<p>i think hepstar is forgetting that there are social/cultural/educational factors that determine someone’s SAT scores. it’s not as simple as “dumb black kid” vs. “smart asian kid.” Whether the disadvantages faced by some minority population segments justify AA is debatable but don’t forget that they exist, they should certainly carry some weight when determining policy. the extent is what’s debatable.</p>
<p>
What exactly does the phrase “looks black” mean? What does a black person look like? </p>
<p>There is an undertone in this whole anti-AA diatribe that is pretty scary stuff, of course that’s just my opinion.</p>
<p>“What about Jian Li & MIT indeed? Are you claiming that MIT discriminates against Asians? ROTFL. Have you visited?”</p>
<p>Actually I have. Asians constitute 24% of MITs student body? Compare that to UCLA, which is AA free. UCLA is 41% Asian, 17% more than MIT, which is thought of as a heavily Asian school. Don’t these statistics show that a large % of Asians are denied admission because of AA?</p>
<p>Here are some more Asian % at the colleges Jian Li wasn’t accepted:</p>
<p>Harvard: 19%
Princeton: 13%
UPenn: 17%
Stanford: 23%</p>
<p>Look at the difference between these percentages and the 41%at non-AA UCLA. UC Berkeley, which is also AA-free, is 47% Asian. UC Irvine is 52% Asian. Can you now see what AA does to Asian applicants? </p>
<p>(By the way, these percentages are straight off the college board website if you wish to look them up).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So. If the world was fair all elite colleges would be @ half asian? Is that your point?</p>
<p>Have you also considered the demographics of CA vs. MA, not to mention the respective sizes of the schools? As well, even for Princeton, the percentage of Asians is far higher than that of the general population. So how does that show discrimination?</p>
<p>As for “looks black” did the applicant send in a photograph? I know my kids did not. How do an applicant’s looks figure in the college admissions process?</p>
<p>“There is an undertone in this whole anti-AA diatribe that is pretty scary.”</p>
<p>If there is any undertone in this thread, it is from the AA supports who refuse to notice what it does to Asians. Are you that naive that you ignore the statistics which show what AA does to them? </p>
<p>You’re arguments against my Asian discrimination have thus far been that colleges want the “whole package,” not just a smart kid with no personality. What I gather from this is that you stereotype Asians as the smart kids with no personality. Talk about racial undertone. They are human beings who have rights just like the rest of us.</p>
<p>I double-dog dare you to spend a week volunteering in a true urban school.
See the classrooms with old or missing textbooks. meet a student who has never had a tutor, taken a prep class or been to a summer camp for the gifted. Had no one helping pump up the EC’s with volunteer trips to poor countries, language lessons, etc. Who has spent grammar and middle school -maybe high school as well with kids who are aggressively anti-school. Go see what it is like for a week, for real, in a classroom, then see how it looks to you.
I was in a rural school rather than an urban one, but I hit college as a biology major who had never touched a microscope. I had never seen a dissection let alone done one. You have NO clue what it is like, at least I hope so.
If you understand you had a ton of things to move you to the top, and only resent someone evening up the apps by considering the effort of the students who didn’t have your advantages - you are the kind of student that the colleges do not want.
They want kids smart enough to be proud of what they’ve done but also that understand and appreciate what others went through to get to the same levels.
It is a sorry thing to read a few people here moaning about the “disadvantages” of being white. So, pull your kids out of the nice school, dump the tutors, move to Newark, NJ and put them in public school. It is the SAME right?</p>
<p>“Have you also considered the demographics of CA vs. MA, not to mention the respective sizes of the schools?” </p>
<p>Stanford is in CA. It has a 23% Asian population. Compare that to the percentages at the UC’s, which hovers in the mid to upper 40s. Numbers don’t lie. </p>
<p>“As well, even for Princeton, the percentage of Asians is far higher than that of the general population. So how does that show discrimination?”</p>
<p>The percentage is still much lower than it is at the UC schools, which are the best thing to go by since the give us an idea of what colleges would look like without AA. Personally, I wouldn’t have a problem with a school being half-Asian. If they earn their way in, they have the right to a seat.</p>
<p>“So. If the world was fair all elite colleges would be @ half asian? Is that your point?”</p>
<p>Maybe not half, but certainly more than it is now. We’ll never really know unless AA is done away with. The best indicator we have now is the UC system. Based on it, I think it’s fair to say that AA is limiting the Asian population at colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, now YOU are on the spot!</p>
<p>Since we are too naive or ignorant, PLEASE do show us the statistics WHICH SHOW WHAT AA DOES to Asians, with the stress on … DOES TO ASIANS! </p>
<p>Since you wrote the terms in an undisputable manner, you should have NO PROBLEM to SHOW what you proposed. So, please do not post simple links to studies that have debated ad nauseam on CC. You HAVE to SHOW! However, since you KNOW what we decide to ignore, it should be a cinch for you. </p>
<p>Here’s your opportunity to elevate the debate to something meaningful.</p>
<p>
And why do assume that those slots would go to Asians? LOL. That’s a biiiiiggg jump. Why not Whites? Freed of the shackles of all thing “diverse”, what if colleges went back to preferring Caucasians over Asians? Would you like that better? </p>
<p>What DOES it do to them (Asians) , hepstar? Make them go to Yale instead of Harvard? Berkeley instead of Stanford? Why do you keep insisting on making this a Asian versus URM matter?</p>
<p>“I double-dog dare you to spend a week volunteering in a true urban school.
See the classrooms with old or missing textbooks. meet a student who has never had a tutor, taken a prep class or been to a summer camp for the gifted. Had no one helping pump up the EC’s with volunteer trips to poor countries, language lessons, etc. Who has spent grammar and middle school -maybe high school as well with kids who are aggressively anti-school. Go see what it is like for a week, for real, in a classroom, then see how it looks to you.
I was in a rural school rather than an urban one, but I hit college as a biology major who had never touched a microscope. I had never seen a dissection let alone done one. You have NO clue what it is like, at least I hope so.
If you understand you had a ton of things to move you to the top, and only resent someone evening up the apps by considering the effort of the students who didn’t have your advantages - you are the kind of student that the colleges do not want.
They want kids smart enough to be proud of what they’ve done but also that understand and appreciate what others went through to get to the same levels.
It is a sorry thing to read a few people here moaning about the “disadvantages” of being white. So, pull your kids out of the nice school, dump the tutors, move to Newark, NJ and put them in public school. It is the SAME right?”</p>
<p>This post is so irrelevant. The applicants (including the minorities) in the NYC mag article went to top-notch high schools. They didn’t have to deal with missing textbooks or incompetent teachers. Yet, they still had AA in their favor because of their race.</p>
<p>“Since we are too naive or ignorant, PLEASE do show us the statistics WHICH SHOW WHAT AA DOES to Asians, with the stress on … DOES TO ASIANS!”</p>
<p>Did you not see post #123. Here it is again so you can’t ignore it:</p>
<p>Actually I have. Asians constitute 24% of MITs student body? Compare that to UCLA, which is AA free. UCLA is 41% Asian, 17% more than MIT, which is thought of as a heavily Asian school. Don’t these statistics show that a large % of Asians are denied admission because of AA?</p>
<p>Here are some more Asian % at the colleges Jian Li wasn’t accepted:</p>
<p>Harvard: 19%
Princeton: 13%
UPenn: 17%
Stanford: 23%</p>
<p>Look at the difference between these percentages and the 41% at non-AA UCLA. UC Berkeley, which is also AA-free, is 47% Asian. UC Irvine is 52% Asian. Can you now see what AA does to Asian applicants?</p>
<p>The statistics in the above post give us an idea of the percentage of Asians affected by AA. Without it, over 40% of a school’s population would be Asian (as the UC system shows). With it, this number sinks below 20% at many schools.</p>
<p>Hep,</p>
<p>Using the UCs as an example does not prove anything other than the fact that Asians, as a whole, may score higher on GPAs and SATs. UCs pretty much focus only on those stats.</p>
<p>A non-Asian could (and very well may) file a suit against the UCs, alleging that by emphasizing GPAs and SATs in admissions, Asians are favored, and therefore they ipso facto discriminate against all other races.</p>
<p>Sorry, Hepstar those numbers do NOT SHOW what AA does to Asians. </p>
<p>You are simply listing admission numbers. Try again!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you trying to establish that UC has seriously advantaged Asians in California and created statistical distortions?</p>
<p>Aren’t you ignoring the countless candidates from California who DO have choices beyond the UC system?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not at all!</p>
<p>Hint: Where are the correlations between application pools and admission numbers? Where are the absolute numbers of asians with more than 650 Verbal scores? When do you start running out of POTENTIAL candidates? Do you know how many SLOTS there are in ALL schools? </p>
<p>Remember, YOU need to show. So far, there is NOTHING!</p>
<p>you use generalities - see what happens to Asians, talking about URM -does anyone know ANY with 2400 and a rejection- then respond to my post that you are only discussing the kids in the one article.
you want to wallow in anger and self-righteousness, feel free.</p>
<p>That argument doesn’t explain why technological institutions like MIT have lower percentages of Asian students than the UC’s. MIT and Caltech aren’t known for their sports programs. They’re known for producing great minds in the field of science. This type of university is the perfect fit for the mathematically gifted Asian student. Despite this, both MIT and Caltech have lower Asian percentages than the UCs. The only exlpaination for this is AA as the percentages suggest.</p>
<p>“Sorry, Hepstar those numbers do NOT SHOW what AA does to Asians.”</p>
<p>“You are simply listing admission numbers. Try again!”</p>
<p>I think my numbers speak for themselves. They effectively comapre the percentage of Asians at non-AA schools to the percentage of Asians at AA schools. There is a obvious difference in the percentages as a result of AA limiting Asian admissions.</p>
<p>Sorry xiggi, my numbers are stronger evidence than your emotionally-fueled verbiage. Where are your statistics? As I said before, numbers don’t lie. You haven’t provided any yet. I have. So until you do, your argument is nothing more than assumptions and emotion. </p>
<p>“Are you trying to establish that UC has seriously advantaged Asians in California and created statistical distortions?”</p>
<p>NO! I am merely using the non-AA UC system as an example of how Asian admittnace levels would be much higher if AA was done away with.</p>