Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates arrested

[Northstarmom]

<p>Several posters have incorrectly stated or implied that the top colleges only care about race/ethnicity not socioeconomic status, when it comes to using certain characteristics as tip factors for admission. </p>

<p>Applicants who qualify for admission to places like Ivies, and have rare qualities that the universities desire, definitely have advantages in admissions because such universities want student bodies that are active and are diverse in all meanings of the word “diverse.” Such universities view the education that students get by participating in ECs and interacting with other students is as important as is the education that students get in class.</p>

<p>Characteristics that can make qualified applicants of any race stand out in the admission pool are: being a stellar athlete, being very wealthy, being very poor, coming from parts of the world or the U.S. that are underrepresented (rural U.S. and inner city backgrounds tend to be underrepresented), having demonstrated interest and talent in majors that have a hard time attracting students.</p>

<p>Students who belong to racial and ethnic groups that are underrepresented when the percentage of such students at the university is compared to the percentage of people of that ethnicity or race in the general U.S. population also have an advantage (though such students aren’t the shoo-ins for admission that many CC posters incorrectly assume).</p>

[amciw]

<p>

@NearL

Yes, it does. Because socioeconomic AA would probably just be a slightly more sensitive race-based Affirmative Action. The average poor black student would still get slightly more lenient admission standards than the average poor white student because the average poor black student is more disadvantaged. In such a scenario, AA is still race-based,it’s just sensitive to socioeconomic status.</p>

<p>HYP has already begun a similar program. They and a few other elite colleges will probably be the only schools to implement any sort of socioeconomic status. Most of other colleges are either too uncompetitive or strapped for cash.</p>

<p>Good luck on your crusade against AA, though.

</p>

<p>No, no it doesn’t. If there is any correlation between socioeconomic condition and race, so that most poor people benefiting are black, and those requiring the most boost are likewise black, then that is fine. It is not fine to see students with a bevy of opportunities getting a boost as a result of their skin color. Switching to socioeconomic based affirmative action remedies this; it is much more fair than the current manifestation of the system, and I don’t see what is so difficult to comprehend about that.</p>

<p>

@poetsheart

Thanks for clearing that up, dbate. But for the record, your description of your friendship with this guy did not in anyway sound to me as if you were “enamored” with him. It sounded like you trusted him a great deal, and believed he was a true blue friend. I understand that guys seldom have a friend in whom they feel they can confide everything, and the fact that you found you were wrong about this guy must have hurt a great deal. It never occurred to me that because you felt he was an especially close friend, that it meant you harbored romantic feelings toward him.</p>

<p>However, I’ve come to observe that a lot of young men today use the word, “gay” to describe behavior that they think is silly or stupid. I had to confront my own son his use of this term last year. He admitted he’d never considered how hurtful it was to attach the word “gay” to socially awkward behavior.

</p>

<p>It was very easy to see such an interpretation, actually. From the explicit meaning of men to the multiple ‘really’ adjective used, if one had any inkling to see it as implying or hinting at homosexuality, they could get such an interpretation. Thinking it was implying stupid makes less sense than thinking he was intending to use the literal meaning.</p>

<p>

I don’t recall anyone anywhere in this thread who said the rude and race-based comments made by those women to keymom were in any way justified. Quotes please.

</p>

<p>It was half meant in a general sense, but here you go. The following implicitly does so:</p>

<p>

@Northstarmom

So, if just once in your life you have been insulted by a black person due to your race, count yourself lucky and use your pain to empathize with people who had many such encounters, and that includes encounters that involved their being legally prevented from doing things like even using the library due to their race.

</p>

<p>I’ll save you the explanation how, since it’s quite evident how one could discern such a message from the sentence.</p>

[poetsheart]

<p>Go back and read Northstarmom’s post, no. 1436. If you feel it necessary to maintain your sense of righteous indignation after doing so, feel free…:rolleyes:</p>

[Northstarmom]

<p>Here’s a link to the full text of the e-mail sent by the Boston cop, Justin Barrett (who is not the cop who arrested Gates), who called Gates a “bumbling jungle monkey.”</p>

<p>[Full</a> email sent by Justin Barrett](<a href=“FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul”>FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul)</p>

[amciw]

<p>I read it; it seems a bit contradictory to me, but better than when I initially read it. My point about needing to disregard race still stands, though. The black women in the anecdote were using history to justify their own racism, even if Northstarmom wasn’t.</p>

<p>Also, I like how you’ve ignored most of my points. I believe I’ll interpret that as a concession that I am right.</p>

<p>

@Northstarmom

Several posters have incorrectly stated or implied that the top colleges only care about race/ethnicity not socioeconomic status, when it comes to using certain characteristics as tip factors for admission.

</p>

<p>The chance threads on CC suggest that race takes significant precedence over socioeconomic status. I’m sure they care, but they care much more about an applicant’ skin color and ancestry.</p>

[Northstarmom]

<p>"These are not new lessons taught to black children sitting at the dinner table.</p>

<p>They are old lessons, repeated in an oral tradition for survival. Told by grandmothers with wrinkled hands, grandfathers who saw something way back when, worried mothers talking in hypotheticals.</p>

<p>They are lessons you don’t want to teach a child because it could make him feel vulnerable, crack her innocence, pop this generation’s colorblind bubble.</p>

<p>So you wait until it’s absolutely necessary and relevant, and explain it like this:</p>

<p>If you are ever stopped by the police, be polite. Say: “Yes, sir. No, sir.” Make no sudden movements. Do not try to run.</p>

<p>Why? they ask.</p>

<p>And that’s when you tell them: You are a black child in America. There is a history here. So, baby, just be careful.</p>

<p>“I tell them if a police officer comes up to you, all you have to say is, ‘Okay, officer. Yes, sir. Thank you.’ Then move on. Don’t say nothing smart,” says James Thompson, whose son is 15 and tall for his age. He goes to school in Bethesda, has white friends, spends his time skateboarding through the streets. He’s a baby, really, living in a “post-racial” world.</p>

<p>“That is one thing I’m scared of,” says Thompson, a proud man who does not like to feel scared. “They don’t know the danger that is out there. They don’t know this happens all the time, but it just happened to happen to a prominent man.”…</p>

<p>“Black parents are using this as a case in point of what they have been saying all along,” says Ronald Walters, professor emeritus of politics at the University of Maryland. “We live in a different era where kids are less racially conscious. A lot don’t believe that stuff their parents talk about. They say, ‘That is your era. Things are different now.’ But parents have been trying to make the case racism hasn’t gone away and they are likely to confront it, especially black males.”</p>

<p>Just two weeks ago, Walters had the same conversation with his 17-year-old nephew, who had stayed out too late. “I picked him up at a Metro station,” Walters recalls. "I was telling him, ‘If you don’t get hit in the head by a mugger, you are going to be stopped by the cops.’ He said, ‘Yeah, Daddy told me that.’ "</p>

<p>Why that conversation?</p>

<p>“Because they are stopped by the police all the time,” Walters says. “That is part of the rite of passage for a black male.”
[Cautious</a> Parents Impart Lessons of How to Behave Around Authority Figures - washingtonpost.com](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/29/AR2009072903547_2.html?hpid=features1&hpv=national]Cautious”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/29/AR2009072903547_2.html?hpid=features1&hpv=national)</p>

[purpleflurp]

<p>The email written by Justin Barrett confirms that being a racist is only one of his many issues. He is also a misogynist and has anger issues as well. Glad he was fired immediately.</p>

[poetsheart]

<p>I honestly don’t see how any black kid on the planet can escape the “you only got into XYZ because you’re black” accusation. I really don’t. If he can’t prove that his stats are higher than every other applicant, he got an AA boost in the eyes of many people. It doesn’t matter that huge numbers of whites got into the same schools with lower stats than his. It only matters that some white applicants with higher stats than his were rejected. It really puts a black kid in a no win situation, especially in light of the fact that the meme that “you only got in because of your race” has been around since time out of mind. When the first black kids matriculated into UVA, Amherst, Harvard, etc., they were accused of not being qualified enough then, also. And this was looooong before the advent of Affirmative Action. I can’t think of a time when there wasn’t resentment over African Americans being admitted to elite colleges. It has always been assumed that they didn’t merit admission. Always..</p>

<p>And it doesn’t matter if you graduate Suma Cum Laude from Harvard Law School, or that you were Editor of the Prestigious Law Review, either. Where are you transcripts, proving that you were such a great student? Never mind that no white law school grad with those bonafides would be questioned as to his academic merit in such a way. That’s why your outrage rings hollow, amciw. You’re headed to one of America’s most prestigious, highly regarded schools in the country, but because one of your AfAm classmates got into a school you did not, it’s proof positive that he didn’t really deserve his spot. I’m sorry, but that sounds just plain mean spirited and in no small way petty. You can dress up your outrage in anyway you see fit, but that’s the bottom line.</p>

[calmom]

<p>

@amciw

I’m done with applications, and heading to a HYPS school like you are. That doesn’t preclude me from reflecting on the college admissions process I underwent, and analyzing it. From my perspective, race is weighed too heavily, and was responsible for that particular student’s application success.

You don’t know what the difference was in the admissions decision. As a parent of a white middle class financial-aid needing female, daughter of two JD-holding parents, whose test scores put her in the bottom 25% of at least 4 competitive colleges that admitted her — I can assure you that its not all about race. </p>

<p>My sense is that if a rejected student is comparing their stats or accomplishments with an accepted student – the rejected student’s problem is that they don’t understand the process. Its not about competing with other applicants – its about standing out on your own, and the standing out can be in very subtle ways. (My daughter didn’t have a single “award” to list on her college applications, she didn’t play sports, she wasn’t “president” or “captain” of anything… and oh, did I mention she’s white? )</p>

<p>I hope that as you start college you will get out of the habit of thinking of yourself as a package of attributes to be compared to others around you, and instead will try to focus on your own development as a person and the pursuit of your interests, to the best of your abilities. </p>

<p>If I was making college admissions decisions on the basis of what I know from cc posts-- I’d choose another applicant over you, because I’d think “this guy has a chip on his shoulder”. I wouldn’t want the kid who is worrying about whether it is fair or not that some other kid got to go first – I’d be more interested in the kid who showed compassion for someone else, who was looking for ways to help and support others and showed that quality in his interactions and writings. Those sort of things tend to show up through teacher recs and essays in the application process. </p>

<p>The fact that you ASSUME that race was a factor as opposed to recognizing the role that intangible personality factors might play also is a strike against you – if nothing else, it shows a lack of imagination. </p>

<p>I’m not trying to come down hard on you, but I really can’t understand why you would spend one ounce of energy on resentment of someone else’s good fortune when obviously you also have been the beneficiary of good fortune, in that you, too, have been admitted to a top Ivy. Why attribute it to race? Did you see his essay? Did you see his LORs? </p>

<p>-
I think that your post illustrates what minorities have to deal with, though. No one would decide that my daughter did well in admissions because of her race or ethnicity. Yet if she were a black or hispanic student with the exact same profile and exact same set of college admission results, there would be people like you who would attribute it to AA.</p>

[poetsheart]

<p>

@calmom

I’m not trying to come down hard on you, but I really can’t understand why you would spend one ounce of energy on resentment of someone else’s good fortune when obviously you also have been the beneficiary of good fortune, in that you, too, have been admitted to a top Ivy.

</p>

<p>Exactly.</p>

<p>

@calmom

I think that your post illustrates what minorities have to deal with, though. No one would decide that my daughter did well in admissions because of her race or ethnicity. Yet if she were a black or hispanic student with the exact same profile and exact same set of college admission results, there would be people like you who would attribute it to AA.

</p>

<p>Once again, spot on.</p>

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

<p>

The chance threads on CC suggest that race takes significant precedence over socioeconomic status. I’m sure they care, but they care much more about an applicant’ skin color and ancestry.

</p>

<p>The chance threads on CC are games. Different responses use different weighting systems. All of those weighting systems are guess. Furthermore, those chance threads are far more likely to include race than socioeconomic status. If they do give socioeconomic information, it’s usually incredibly vague anyway. And again, the chance threads are basically just games.</p>

[poetsheart]

<p>

Here’s a link to the full text of the e-mail sent by the Boston cop, Justin Barrett (who is not the cop who arrested Gates), who called Gates a “bumbling jungle monkey.”

</p>

<p>Well isn’t that just special…:rolleyes:</p>

<p>He used the terms, “Banana-eating Jungle Monkey”, “Jungle Monkey” or “Bumbling Jungle Monkey” no less than three different times during the course of that little foam-at-the-mouth tirade (…I wonder if he’s ever attended a Sarah Palin rally…:rolleyes:). But then, he actually has the unmitigated gall to insist, “I’m not a racist”.:eek: (I’m beginning to notice a trend in this particular brand of Denial, Denial, Denial Strategy…)</p>

<p>And doesn’t it just warm the cockles of your heart to know that this guy would have sprayed Henry Louis Gates in the face with pepper spray for mouthing off? Yet another proud, God-fearin’ and patriotic American who would deprive a man of his Constitutional rights just because he deems that man unworthy of them. </p>

<p>Yes indeed, it would seem this guy was fired just in the nick of time. But, I’m sure he’ll not want for employment for very long. He’s sure to have already received any number of job offers from people who agree wholeheartedly with his twisted point of view—might even have gotten a call from Glen Beck by now.</p>

[amciw]

<p>

@poetsheart

I honestly don’t see how any black kid on the planet can escape the “you only got into XYZ because you’re black” accusation. I really don’t. If he can’t prove that his stats are higher than every other applicant, he got an AA boost in the eyes of many people. It doesn’t matter that huge numbers of whites got into the same schools with lower stats than his. It only matters that some white applicants with higher stats than his were rejected. It really puts a black kid in a no win situation, especially in light of the fact that the meme that “you only got in because of your race” has been around since time out of mind. When the first black kids matriculated into UVA, Amherst, Harvard, etc., they were accused of not being qualified enough then, also. And this was looooong before the advent of Affirmative Action. I can’t think of a time when there wasn’t resentment over African Americans being admitted to elite colleges. It has always been assumed that they didn’t merit admission. Always…

</p>

<p>Sadly, with race-based AA a factor, such kids will never know if their qualifications alone garnered them admission. As of know, with the well-documented use of race-based AA, it is valid to tell these kids their race played some part in helping them get accepted. The size of the part may vary, of course, but it helped.</p>

<p>

And it doesn’t matter if you graduate Suma Cum Laude from Harvard Law School, or that you were Editor of the Prestigious Law Review, either. Where are you transcripts, proving that you were such a great student? Never mind that no white law school grad with those bonafides would be questioned as to his academic merit in such a way. That’s why your outrage rings hollow, amciw. You’re headed to one of America’s most prestigious, highly regarded schools in the country, but because one of your AfAm classmates got into a school you did not, it’s proof positive that he didn’t really deserve his spot. I’m sorry, but that sounds just plain mean spirited and in no small way petty. You can dress up your outrage in anyway you see fit, but that’s the bottom line.

</p>

<p>For the second time, I never stated they did not deserve admission. I am sick of having false accusations thrown at me because you refuse to read my posts and understand them. I said that I think he was deserving of a spot, but would not have been met with such success had he not been black.</p>

<p>

@calmom

You don’t know what the difference was in the admissions decision. As a parent of a white middle class financial-aid needing female, daughter of two JD-holding parents, whose test scores put her in the bottom 25% of at least 4 competitive colleges that admitted her — I can assure you that its not all about race.

</p>

<p>That’s promising to hear. Can you give the name of one college so I can get a sense of how competitive they were?</p>

<p>How, though, is a family with two JDs requiring financial assistance?</p>

<p>

My sense is that if a rejected student is comparing their stats or accomplishments with an accepted student – the rejected student’s problem is that they don’t understand the process. Its not about competing with other applicants – its about standing out on your own, and the standing out can be in very subtle ways. (My daughter didn’t have a single “award” to list on her college applications, she didn’t play sports, she wasn’t “president” or “captain” of anything… and oh, did I mention she’s white? )

</p>

<p>Luck happens (jk)…and they do understand the process, to some extent. I understand exactly while Stanford makes decisions, and I know that race is often weighed into these decisions.</p>

<p>

I hope that as you start college you will get out of the habit of thinking of yourself as a package of attributes to be compared to others around you, and instead will try to focus on your own development as a person and the pursuit of your interests, to the best of your abilities.

</p>

<p>I’ve already done this.</p>

<p>

If I was making college admissions decisions on the basis of what I know from cc posts-- I’d choose another applicant over you, because I’d think “this guy has a chip on his shoulder”. I wouldn’t want the kid who is worrying about whether it is fair or not that some other kid got to go first – I’d be more interested in the kid who showed compassion for someone else, who was looking for ways to help and support others and showed that quality in his interactions and writings. Those sort of things tend to show up through teacher recs and essays in the application process.

</p>

<p>Honesty is an issue? Speaking what I think about the truth is an issue? Worrying about fairness and equality is an issue? What kind of conformist academic institution are you running?</p>

<p>

The fact that you ASSUME that race was a factor as opposed to recognizing the role that intangible personality factors might play also is a strike against you – if nothing else, it shows a lack of imagination.</p>

<p>I’m not trying to come down hard on you, but I really can’t understand why you would spend one ounce of energy on resentment of someone else’s good fortune when obviously you also have been the beneficiary of good fortune, in that you, too, have been admitted to a top Ivy. Why attribute it to race? Did you see his essay? Did you see his LORs?

</p>

<p>I don’t assume race was a factor; I know it was. I likewise know that the intangibles helped, as did his ECs and recommendation letters. I am not, however, naive nor politically correct enough to believe that his race had no factor in his acceptances. I don’t resent that he got in and will be going to a HYPS school. I do resent that AA was the vehicle that got him there with such ease.</p>

<p>As for me spending time on “resentment”, it a result of me reflecting on the process in general. This is merely part of my retrospective analysis thereof.</p>

<p>

I think that your post illustrates what minorities have to deal with, though. No one would decide that my daughter did well in admissions because of her race or ethnicity. Yet if she were a black or hispanic student with the exact same profile and exact same set of college admission results, there would be people like you who would attribute it to AA.

</p>

<p>I’ve addressed this above. Considering our knowledge of how colleges make decisions, it is logical to conclude that is why she was granted her acceptances (were she a minority). Perhaps that is not the case, but there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to back such a supposition up.</p>

<p>

@ThisCouldBeHeavn

The chance threads on CC are games. Different responses use different weighting systems. All of those weighting systems are guess. Furthermore, those chance threads are far more likely to include race than socioeconomic status. If they do give socioeconomic information, it’s usually incredibly vague anyway. And again, the chance threads are basically just games.

</p>

<p>I meant results threads, not chance threads. An oversight when I was rushed in responding.</p>

[poetsheart]

<p>Well amciw, go ahead and wrap yourself up in your nice warm blanket of resentment, work yourself up into a fever pitch of righteous indignation over AA. Pretend that blacks haven’t always had their qualifications questioned, and their intrinsic worth impugned when it comes to college admissions. Knock yourself out. If I was even half as resentful over the everyday white-skin privilege that you enjoy but obviously take for granted on a daily basis, as you are over your black classmate’s getting into a school that rejected you, I’d probably spontaneously combust. But there you have it. Enjoy you life. I have nothing more to say to you on the matter.</p>

[amciw]

<p>Yeah, as you completely ignore what I am saying and actually feel or think in order to support your preconceived notion about the racist ignorance of whites. Try reading what I am saying without attempting to get offended and you will perhaps come to a different understanding. I have nowhere near the resentment you purport; the only way one could construe that is if they were contriving to reach such a conclusion about me.</p>

<p>Seriously, you aren’t even listening to what I am saying. Surely you could afford me such a generosity?</p>

[Dbate]

<p>I have ultimately decided that the ardent opposition to AA is racist. I mean that because people fail to be indignant to the extent that high school matters when admitting people. Amciw, you got into Yale so you got to see Blue Marble. I don’t know if you looked but the number of people coming from top prep schools was ridiculous and I couldn’t help but think that there is NO way in the world that the best students in the country all miraculously happened to go to the same schools: Hotchkiss, Exerter, Andover. It was ridiculous. </p>

<p>But no, I think the primary reason so many are angry over AA is not because it is unfair, but because for one time in the history of the country it actually turns the tables on the racial hierarchy that many people are keenly aware of. Where white is always better than black. And that is why so many people are opposed to it.</p>

[calmom]

<p>

As of know, with the well-documented use of race-based AA, it is valid to tell these kids their race played some part in helping them get accepted. The size of the part may vary, of course, but it helped.

</p>

<p>As of now, with the well-documented skew of the SAT toward high income individuals, it is valid to tell kids* [removed by Mod]* that your family’s money and your privileged lifestyle played a huge part in getting you admitted. I’ve noticed that the number of kids from exceedingly wealthy families at top schools far exceeds their proportion in the population, so it is obvious that there if is favoritism. [removed by Mod]</p>

[calmom]

<p>

Can you give the name of one college so I can get a sense of how competitive they were?

One college, which she turned down, was University of Chicago. I remember that year there the overall admission rate dropped from previous years, and there were a lot of disappointed CC’ers with much higher stats. In particular there was one parent of a waitlisted kid who had much higher numbers & qualifications on paper – and for whom Chicago was the #1 dream school – I felt kind of bad, knowing that my daughter had really applied to Chicago more on a whim than any strong desire to attend. (She liked Chicago because the library reminded her of the great hall at Hogwarts)</p>

<p>But that’s the way these things work out. She had taken a rather creative and whimsical approach to filling out their very pretentious “uncommon” application, and I guess her sense of humor and refusal to take herself too seriously is what made her application stand out in that particular applicant pool.</p>

[amciw]

<p>

@Dbate

I have ultimately decided that the ardent opposition to AA is racist. I mean that because people fail to be indignant to the extent that high school matters when admitting people. Amciw, you got into Yale so you got to see Blue Marble. I don’t know if you looked but the number of people coming from top prep schools was ridiculous and I couldn’t help but think that there is NO way in the world that the best students in the country all miraculously happened to go to the same schools: Hotchkiss, Exerter, Andover. It was ridiculous.</p>

<p>But no, I think the primary reason so many are angry over AA is not because it is unfair, but because for one time in the history of the country it actually turns the tables on the racial hierarchy that many people are keenly aware of. Where white is always better than black. And that is why so many people are opposed to it.

</p>

<p>I have an issue with rich blacks being given help they don’t need, not poor blacks getting help they do need. Socioeconomic AA will give us the latter, and not the former. It moves beyond making distinctions by race, which is a necessity in achieving a racism-free society (as much as it can be, naturally).</p>

<p>I actually didn’t notice how many kids came from those prep schools, but the only states I really studied the Blue Marble in depth in were Oregon, Washington, and Maryland.</p>

<p>

@Calmom

As of now, with the well-documented skew of the SAT toward high income individuals, it is valid to tell kids like you that your family’s money and your privileged lifestyle played a huge part in getting you admitted. I’ve noticed that the number of kids from exceedingly wealthy families at top schools far exceeds their proportion in the population, so it is obvious that there if is favoritism. Given the fact that you do not know the difference between the word “now” and “know”, it seems very clear that you could not possibly meet the standards for admission at an Ivy League college but for your privileged background. How much did your parents contribute in order to buy a spot for you?

</p>

<p>I have never disputed that wealth helps kids get admitted - it does. You can’t attribute this entirely to favoritism, of course, as richer families tend to place more emphasis on education, and more intelligent kids come from richer families (don’t jump on me for this; richer people are usually more intelligent, and they pass this to their kids - there are exceptions in both instances) but otherwise, I would like to see a student body that represents America’s socioeconomic distribution a bit better than it does. I am neither a minority nor anywhere near wealthy (although not near poor either), so I had about as little help as possible in getting accepted. I value parity, which is why I dislike AA and a preference for wealth so much.</p>

<p>And seriously, I would expect a bit more maturity out of a parent of your age? Raising a petty grievance over a typo? Assuming I’m rich? I thought adults, and especially parents (with a JD) of kids going to a selective college would be above that. That evidently is nothing more than an idealistic view of reality.</p>

<p>

One college, which she turned down, was University of Chicago. I remember that year there the overall admission rate dropped from previous years, and there were a lot of disappointed CC’ers with much higher stats. In particular there was one parent of a waitlisted kid who had much higher numbers & qualifications on paper – and for whom Chicago was the #1 dream school – I felt kind of bad, knowing that my daughter had really applied to Chicago more on a whim than any strong desire to attend. (She liked Chicago because the library reminded her of the great hall at Hogwarts)</p>

<p>But that’s the way these things work out. She had taken a rather creative and whimsical approach to filling out their very pretentious “uncommon” application, and I guess her sense of humor and refusal to take herself too seriously is what made her application stand out in that particular applicant pool.

</p>

<p>UChicago is well-known for emphasizing essays more than most top schools. It seems logical that your daughter’s witty writing won over the admissions committee and led to her acceptance.</p>

[calmom]

<p>

Considering our knowledge of how colleges make decisions, it is logical to conclude that is why she was granted her acceptances (were she a minority). Perhaps that is not the case, but there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to back such a supposition up.

[edited out by Mod]
The “anecdotal” evidence that I see is that Ivies have a disproportionate number of wealth students and jocks in attendance, and that many of the least academically qualified fit in one of those 2 categories. So what assumptions should I be drawing from that?</p>