I wish I weren't Asian

<p>I read this thread less and less because one has to keep shaking his head in disbelief.</p>

<p>Preference for first generation students means favoring those without any parent who are college graduate. It is meant for helping poor families. Professional overseas families certainly does not qualify.</p>

<p>bomgeedad,
I agree that that was the original intent of the provision (indeed, another way to give a boost to families in poverty, appreciating that those who come here without built-up wealth need the recognition of First Generation, as well as immigration), but that is not how it’s been applied recently. </p>

<p>This is the point that Drossel, and AdOfficer have been making, among others: that unless specific provisions are put in to protect & include students <em>without</em> built-in advantages such as professional and/or educated parents, those students will fall through the cracks of “meritocracy.” And those inclusive provisions were not meant to overlook lack of ability, but as an add-on to proven ability & accomplishment.</p>

<p>I’ve come to conclude that most supporters of race-based affirmative action advocate policies that address the effects of existing inequalities (recognition) as opposed to policies that target their causes (solution).</p>

<p>Hopefully, my generation will aggressively seek solutions to the problems instead of merely recognizing their existence. Apparently, civil rights initiatives funded by Mr. Connerly are going to be on the ballots of at least four states in 2008. It’s time we ended a system that has been largely ineffective.</p>

<p>First generation means university education, not immigration status. You don’t have to take my word for it, start a new thread on this topic and see what other people say.</p>

<p>The irony is that most of Harvard’s black students (and a large percentage of black students in other elite colleges,) have background similar to the Asian students. That is they are children of immigrants (from Africa or Caribbean) often with professional background. They are highly motived like the Asians, they value education, good grades and good SAT scores. So this is hardly an Asian issue.</p>

<p>See
<a href=“http://www.nuatc.org/articles/pdf/CollegesTakeMoreTopBlacks.pdf[/url]”>www.nuatc.org/articles/pdf/CollegesTakeMoreTopBlacks.pdf</a></p>

<p>bomgeedad,
I know it’s not immigration per se, but rather First Generation to attend college. However, some have interpreted that as meaning first to attend a U.S. college. That’s how that add-on is advantaged.</p>

<p>The intent of the original provision was to give an additional boost to those who were 1st generation in itself or 1st generation because of recent immigration with non-formally educated parents.</p>

<p>fabrizio,
I definitely hear what you’re saying. Unfortunately, the two elements cannot be separated, & this is what Drosselmeier was trying to illustrate. Accounting for their existence helps to address solutions, directly, by providing live role models to which a larger community can similarly aspire.</p>

<p>OK, name a college that has a policy to give preference to those first to attend a U.S. college, regardless of whether their parent are college graduate.</p>

<p>Better yet, name a UC that has such a policy, as this is how this discussion starts.</p>

<p>bomgeedad,
Of course there’s no such official UC policy, nor did I claim that. I’m saying that some applicants interpret the policy that way, as I’ve heard this assertion more than once. (I have no data as to how widespread that misinterpretation is.) And obviously the NYT writer interpreted the policy that way, albeit inaccurately.</p>

<p>No, first generation resident does not equal first gen. to attend college, in the case cited. (In many other cases the two do converge, though.)</p>

<p>Moving right along…
I do find it ironic that the flagship U of one of the most diverse States of the Union, population wise, has a less diverse freshman class, proportionally speaking, than the large metro areas of LA and SF…so much so that one of the students profiled feels the need to go get some diversity.</p>

<p>This is what’s wrong with America.</p>

<p>Be proud of who you are. Don’t let any unfair forms of affirmative action stop that.</p>

<p>I wonder what thet title “Preferences by any other name” means.</p>

<p>If some applicants has some misinterpretation about admission policy, shouldn’t we do these applicants a favor by pointing out the misinterpretation rather than propagate the misinterpretation. That is the purpose of cc discussion forums. Applicants may have misinterpretation, but ADCOM would not have that misinterpretation. So it only hurt the applicants.</p>

<p>Any applicant may misinterpret (or in some cases, deliberately deceive, not that I’m suggesting that happened in the case mentioned), & a committee not have time to investigate individually each checked box. If it sounds believable, they would be more likely to accept it without further investigation.</p>

<p>Little Asia on the Hill
By TIMOTHY EGAN
Published: January 7, 2007</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Just a little more fuel for the fire…</p>

<p>Not really. I read that article yesterday.</p>

<p>Aside from the use of overrepresented, I thought it was rather balanced.</p>

<p>You get the reactionary remarks from some, and you get the progressive statements from others.</p>

<p>Very true…:)</p>

<p>I thought it was somewhat balanced as well.</p>

<p>Of course, our definitions of reactionary and progressive differ.</p>

<p>Nevertheless, they’re there.</p>

<p>There have been some comments on here referring to what we in admissions think of Asian-American students. Just a little FYI ? we are asking Asian-American students the same thing we ask of all students: have you done the most with the opportunities you?ve had? We do understand that there are cultural differences within the Asian-American communities in this country (and abroad); we do understand that assumptions are made about Asian-American students being ?math/science? people. But guess what? I?m just as impressed by a black kid or white kid or Latino kid who is a ?math/science? person. But what impresses us most are kids of any race who are ?academic people? period. And for the record keisukey, there are plenty of athletically-talented Asian-American students out there. </p>

<p>Our expectations are not different for Asian-American students. If you are an Asian-American student with parents who are not college-educated, do not make a lot of money, and go to a crappy school, we are going to weigh this heavily when considering your achievements. If, however, you are an Asian-American kid with college-educated parents, go to a very good high school, and are relatively well-off financially, we are going to expect you?ve done a lot with the opportunities you?ve had ? just as if you were white, black, Latino, or Native American in the same situation. </p>

<p>Venkater ? your comments are seriously offensive. Qualify ?underqualified people? and support your comments with fact before making inflammatory, gross generalizations about different groups of people. Oh, and ?in the real world? there are plenty of white folks who get jobs over ?qualified? people of color because they are white or because of nepotism or other connections a lot of URMs are not privy to. </p>

<p>Arti ? just because you have good grades in math doesn?t make you stereotypical anything. EVERYONE applying to the most selective schools in the country has good grades in everything. I bet your interview did set you apart ? because you?re the only you out there! </p>

<p>As far as the confusion about ?first generation? ? if both of your parents attended a four-year college ? anywhere ? you are not first generation. If only one parent did, we consider that. However, we do take into account students who are first generation Americans as well. For example, if a student?s parents immigrated to the United States and the student was born here, it is important to consider that perhaps they will not have an understanding of how American higher education works; they may not have familiarity with our standardized testing; English may not be their first language or the language spoken at home. All this can play out in a student?s academic achievement. </p>

<p>I want to also make something very clear that I don?t think I?ve mentioned before?or anyone else has, for that matter. In admissions, we look very closely at and try to understand a student?s potential for academic and social growth. This CAN play a large role in some of the decisions made concerning many students, including URM students. There is a lot of research out there which suggests that it is not performance on standardized tests or AP exams that best predicts a student?s potential for college success but rather their performance in high school that does (quite frankly, I would love to get rid of the SAT, but that?s not going to happen soon ? but kudos to Bowdoin, Bates, Mount Holyoke and others!). Thus, your high school performance - coupled with what your teachers say about you and what you say about your learning - weigh very heavily. </p>

<p>Fabrizio…The data used by Bowen and Bok is the College and Beyond Database and available to anyone who wants access to it. That?s why it is there. And there actually have been several criticisms of their work which have actually not been based on their methodology or statistical collection but rather based simply on their audacity to publish this work. They?ve taken heat from opponents of and supports of affirmative action. Their goal (and the goal of most educational research) was not to support or not support one side of an argument or policy but rather to understand the effects of a policy. Bowen and Bok also spend almost 30 pages discussing their methodologies, which ? at least by those of us who have done educational research and have taken doctoral-level statistics and methodology courses ? are solid. Their regressions isolate all variables necessary to present unbiased data; the College and Beyond Database is one of the most comprehensive we have for studying higher education. You are entitled to your opinion that their work is not ?academic? but you would be hard-pressed to prove this to any social sciences, humanities, or education faculty member anywhere. To use your terminology, the numbers actually do ?barely budge? in their simulations concerning the absence of affirmative action. Yes, the number of black students at the College and Beyond schools would ?plummet? without affirmative action, but the actual number of these students at these schools is so small to begin with WITH affirmative action that the real effect of affirmative action is barely felt. Bowen and Bok are talking about a population of students that numbers less than 10% at most ? and less than 5% at many ? schools. And that?s the real point here fabrizio ? affirmative action is benefiting students who need it most while having an extremely minimal negative effect on others. Affirmative action is trying to help a minority of students who apply to these schools from the social disadvantages a much large majority have caused. Is it the cure for bias and racism and discrimination and poverty and homophobia and ethnocentricity? No. But it?s the best band-aid we currently have for them in trying to level the playing field in society. I admire your desire to fix social problems and find solutions, but it isn?t happening any time soon! </p>

<p>Again, I am not sure you are reading carefully if you still think I haven?t explained what affirmative action is?just so you and everyone gets it: in college admissions, affirmative action is a policy which protects an institution?s right to consider the social factors that may have affected a student?s academic performance and achievement thus far. Those social factors include, but are not limited to, race, social class and income level, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and family education level. It is not used in every admissions case, but only in those cases where it is clear that a student has been under-privileged or discriminated against because of these or other social factors. Race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality are not simply biological ? they are also social constructs which people act upon and react to, often in negative ways, and sometime unconsciously.</p>

<p>AdOfficer,</p>

<p>According to Dr. Nieli,</p>

<p>

</a></p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nas.org/reports/river_change/affirm-act_soc-sci.pdf[/url]”>http://www.nas.org/reports/river_change/affirm-act_soc-sci.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>So, no, it’s not available to anyone who asks.</p>

<p>Considering that it’s politically incorrect on a university campus to challenge racial preferences, I highly doubt that Drs. Bowen and Bok feared visible and public backlash against their work.</p>

<p>You’ve actually highlighted one of the biggest flaws in The Shape of the River. Drs. Bowen and Bok used a very atypical sample, acknowledged their limitation, and then proceeded to make huge and broad normative statements in defense of affirmative action everywhere. That’s tantamount to me randomly picking up three decaying books in a university library and then claiming, “All books in this library are in terrible condition!”</p>

<p>Indeed, I will agree with you that affirmative action is a very cheap way out to a huge problem. I disagree, however, that actual change is “not happening anytime soon.” Four new states with civil rights initiatives funded by Mr. Ward Connerly in 2008? It’s happening NOW.</p>

<p>It’s ridiculous. Not all Asians fit that stereotype. At least I don’t.</p>

<p>I have never argued with an admission officer, which is slightly intimidating, but I here there is a first for everything. Evidently, some rather off color (no pun intended) comments have been made; however, I don’t believe that warrants your rather lofty tone. Ultimately, you cannot blame them, as they are not the ones who endorse affirmative action, which is discriminatory by all acounts. Affirmative Action undermines the potential of certain races by insinuating that they require a “little extra help” to succeed. Race, sexuality, and socioeconomic status should be factors I agree, especially considering America’s sordid history, but they should not be deciding factors-and many cases have evinced that they can be. </p>

<p>P.S. This is coming from a foreign liberal, and “financially and domestically challenged” lindividual.</p>

<p>Re Post 376:</p>

<p>Fabrizio, I think what AdOfficer meant by “change” “any time soon” were not Ward Connerly’s anti-AA initiatives. I believe he meant the kinds of solutions to problems you tend to believe are more instantly solvable than they are, and by forces external to those problems. Personally, I don’t find Connerly’s anti-AA initiatives to be “solutions” ending the <em>need</em> for AA in the first place.</p>

<p>One of the reasons that black students do so well in secondary schools & in colleges which are so different from their home environments is that very fact: they ARE different environments. The norms & expectations of those environments can be 180-degrees different from norms & expectations in their neighborhoods & local high schools. It is not difficult to be socially accepted for achieving highly in a school consisting of high achievers.</p>

<p>Where were the “off color” remarks? I must have missed those.</p>