<p>“I find this offensive.”</p>
<p>Pretty funny, coming from someone who had has repeatedly stated having to associate with URMs is constitutionally unfair to Over-Represented-Groups.</p>
<p>“Where would you find that supernatural and omniscient creature that knows what is on … everyone’s mind?”</p>
<p>I’m here! (Sorry about the late arrival. I can’t be ubiquitous everywhere.)</p>
<p>Xiggi, How did you get sucked into this sewer of a discussion? (I know, I know … who can ignore a good train wreck.)</p>
<p>
Good, you avoid them then. I’ll continue to use them.</p>
<p>
Wow, five years of data. I’m talking long term. Generational.</p>
<p>To think Asians with their tiny slice of the population are going to overwhelm the US higher education system is patently absurd.</p>
<p>“If AA goes in college admissions, Asians will overwhelm the American college system.”</p>
<p>Why bother with critical thought when wild unsubstantiated claims hold greater weight with this crowd?</p>
<p>UCBalumnus,</p>
<p>Re the data re URMs in California, don’t you think the huge numbers of hispanics in CA skews the data since many more at CA universities than in othe rparts of country,. If you put AA at CA schools versus AA at the schools you list it would be a much different story per the stats we disucssed a while back (ie, UCSB = 0.4% AA).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Note, however, that the percentage of black people in California is lower than that in the US overall (i.e. the opposite of the Latino situation), so it is not entirely surprising that UCs and CSUs have smaller percentages of black students than schools in other places.</p>
<p>Both are underrepresented among UC eligible and CSU eligible high school graduates (as discussed previously), so whatever UC and CSU do in their admissions processes has only the effect of redistributing the students between different campuses (unless you are suggesting having different UC and CSU eligibility thresholds based on race, even though they are supposed to be just a minimum baseline that is already not a very stringent standard).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where did this quote come from, since a bunch of posters started quoting it starting around #1257?</p>
<p>In any case, that would not occur due to changes in colleges’ admission policies, since those would not have much (if any) effect on the demographics of the pipeline of college-ready high school graduates.</p>
<p>Even in the narrow context of some range of colleges (e.g. the super-selective ones that everyone talks about here), it would still not occur, unless existing affirmative action were being used to favor white applicants over Asian applicants, since the number of URM applicants and admits affected by affirmative action policies is still small compared to the total number of applicants and admits at these schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There was a new poster called something like “GGabriel,” and all of his posts have disappeared.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Indeed, many posters claim a sort of “reverse AA" with respect to Asian applicants. If you merely look at grades and SATs there is certainly some evidence for it. Whether it actually happens in the context of thorough holistic review, I have no idea. I’ve seen arguments on both sides.</p>
<p>Re: #1270</p>
<p>Yes, that has been argued a lot, though it is unlikely that, given the opaqueness of holistic admissions processes, people on the outside will be convinced either way, with respect to any given holistic admissions school. But the magnitude of such a thing, if it exists, is unlikely to be great enough to (by itself) cause Asian students to overwhelm the colleges it is alleged to exist at if it were eliminated.</p>
<p>" UCBalumnus,Re the data re URMs in California, don’t you think the huge numbers of hispanics in CA skews the data since many more at CA universities than in othe parts of country,"</p>
<p>I’m not UCB, but I do. California is not other parts of the country. I could not appreciate that until I raised my kids here. “Hispanic”, “Asian” and “black” means something different than it does in DC, and the Bronx and and in Atlanta. And Wyoming. My D wants to move to Jackson, Wyoming with her bff. Holy cow. 0.4 percent African American. She doesn’t care. That’s the way we raised her. Good for her? Gulp. To me, that is why it’s all relative, and maybe one size should not fit all. Maybe. Or maybe folks should migrate to THEIR best “fit”.</p>
<p>We’re not African American, but having grown up in a school system that was about 40% African American and another 15 % or so Hispanic, every single college looked weird to us.</p>
<p>things I learned from this thread:</p>
<ol>
<li> I never knew Jewish people had been discriminated against at the Ivies.</li>
<li> I found UCB’s dispassionate factual posts to be interesting.</li>
<li> I learned some people really actually believe that SAT scores are more indicative of accomplishment and potential than actual individual accomplishments.</li>
<li> I learned I have a pretty firm belief that our strength, as a country, is in our diversity and not in our collective ability to bubble answers.</li>
</ol>
<p>that is all.</p>
<p>mathmom - I did not realize any school districts in new jersey are so overwhelmingly minority majority type under you are speaking of a single school in your neighborhood?</p>
<p>poetgirl - Ivies and Jews discrimination was a long time ago (until 1960s?). I had an older jewish colleague in the early 90s who told me that when he went to college in 50s, he was told he could not get into any top business schools being jewish. I kind of did not believe him because that sounded racist to me and I believed US was the greatest place on earth having arrived here only 5 years earlier and felt colleges were so overwhelmingly nice to graduate students from other countries!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Several major cities in New Jersey, like Atlantic City, Camden, New Brunswick, and Newark have majority non-white populations.</p>
<p>[New</a> Jersey QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau](<a href=“http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/34000.html]New”>http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/34000.html)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They had been discriminated against in many areas and for a long time, and that’s why many of them are progressive, IMO. I’m not so sure about Asians.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s also why I’m not worried about other countries beat us any time soon.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not to mention Asbury Park, E. Orange, Englewood, Hackensack, Jersey City, Plainfield, and Trenton, among others.</p>
<p>texaspg, there is a parade of alumni at my college reunion. One can get a rough sense of when the constraints on admitting Jews were relaxed (though probably not eliminated) and of when they started admitting blacks. Roughly speaking, the proportion of Jews started to increase around 1965 and the blacks didn’t increase a lot until the late 70s or early 80s, I would say. Before that, there was a very high proportion of folks like J. Buttersworth Wigglesworth (affectionately known as “Wiggles”) who prepped at the Gilman School and played lacrosse.</p>
<p>From the 15% quota, when Jews made up roughly 4% of the population, to now when Jews make up roughly 2% of the population, the change is pretty remarkable: “Jewish students at Harvard, Brown, Columbia and Penn make up 25 percent of their respective undergraduate populations, and at Yale and Cornell, the number is 22 percent, according to data provided by Hillel, a leading international Jewish campus organization.” Even here, without preferences for geographical diversity and athletic recruitment, these numbers would likely be higher. [Princeton and Dartmouth are much lower].</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Lots of discrimination against Asians until the 1960s, although not all of it was exclusively against Asians (or all Asians). E.g. racial segregation in schools, racially restrictive covenants on real estate, Executive Order 9066, immigration policy based on national origins that were considered “desirable” (northern and western European) versus “undesirable” (most others), etc…</p>