<p>STEM v non-STEM seems like just another characterization to knock Asian applicants. Being a STEM major is only seen in a negative light if the applicant is Asian but it is seen as a glowing positive for URMs. The two teens that made national headlines for getting into all 8 Ivies…were URMs declaring pre-med/STEM. Here in SoCal, there is a huge push for getting URMs to go the STEM route. </p>
<p>Should applicants be getting conflicting messages based on race?</p>
<p>The argument is essentially, “Who is a worse applicant? An Asian STEM major or an Asian non-STEM major?” The STEM versus non-STEM is more of a distraction. It is the Asian part that makes the applicant somehow less desirable. The question then becomes: what will hurt an Asian application less? Being STEM or non-STEM?</p>
<p>Other distractions include: LORs, ECs and interviews. ECs performed by Asians seem to be devalued but those same ECs performed by URMs are praised. The Duke study showed that Asian applicants had better ECs and yet the myth that Asians must not have had them is still being perpetuated.</p>