<p>
</p>
<p>Everyone seems to misunderstand Jian Li issue? Nope, but YOU obviously do!</p>
<p>cheers, american citizens don’t have preference over green card holders. My son has exactly the same rights( university admissions-wise) as his peers who are US citizens. We have been in this country for 13 years and we are not US citizens, not because we don’t want to be, but because it took almost 12 years to get a green card( we went through 3 different kind of visas, starting with the student one, then 2 work ones, then about 3 years of actual green card process) . Still, as a permanent resident, our son is considered for admission together with the american citizens, he is getting federal fin aid and is paying in-state tuition.</p>
<p>I am no expert on this, but I think that no one student is guaranteed admission to an ivy league school, even with perfect scores. I personally know a student (white female) who had a 2400 and was valedictorian, who did not get admitted to Princeton, Harvard, or Yale. Clearly, numbers help but are no guarantee.</p>
<p>In the case of Princeton, however, that may have changed for this year, since they accepted a girl from my school who has a 2400, an almost-4.0, but absolutely nothing else (save for a derogatory personality).</p>
<p>Otherwise, for Harvard and Yale, yes, they have definitely always been looking for applicant qualities besides perfect test scores and grades.</p>
<p>Re Post 880:</p>
<p>Underachievement is not being rewarded.</p>
<p>Post 884:
You obviously dislike this student, but (1) you don’t know how she was evaluated by teachers & others, (2) she may have come across quite differently in her application than in person, (3) some people are insecure, & display that insecurity by projecting that onto others, (4) you don’t really know if she had “nothing else” besides scores & grades.</p>
<p>And it is also true, yes, that some very brilliant people are not pleasant to be around. Sometimes a college chooses brilliance over personality, & over character.</p>
<p>Finally, some people do get accepted when many others believe they shouldn’t have been. But that is certainly not limited to Ivies. There are students who don’t <em>even</em> have scores to brag about, nor URM status, who get admitted to and/or recruited by, Publics, to play a sport.</p>
<p>Reply to post 878</p>
<p>cheers, “Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, permanent residents also enjoy the right to be free from discrimination based on their race, ethnicity, and national origin – in employment, education, health care, and housing (among other settings).”</p>
<p>kryptonsa </p>
<p>your classmate’s <em>application</em> was what was evaluated, as epiphany points out, and it is possible that she came across very well on paper. However … I refuse to believe that a committee of adults is going to make the correct decision 100% of the time. Its hard to do - but let it go and move on.</p>
<p>padad. I appreciate your efforts to become US citizens. I know it is not easy. It is my understanding that Jian Li’s family does not intend to become citizens. They intend to remain Chinese citizens. This is an interesting aspect of this case in my opinion. It would not surprise me if Chinese polticial forces were behind this case.</p>
<p>However, in the US, private organizations can and do make legally correct decisions on the basis of race and ethnicity and national origin. That is the crux of this argument.</p>
<p>A few states–California and Michigan–have had massive legal cases to decide the issue of strict merit admissions requirements–for their public universities only. Most states use a highly differentiated ‘merit’ system that does discriminate on the basis of race–and athletic ability and geography and a whole host of other human talents and characteristics. Private schools do as well. they do so to achieve their objectives of affirmative action. That is their right under the law.</p>
<p>Princeton may have eliminated Li on conditions attached to the basis of his race or ethnicity and they are entitled to do so. It is quite possible that he may have been accepted if he had been a US citizen or another race. </p>
<p>However, Princeton does not use a strict ‘merit’ stats system–and I support that decision. I am not a fan of the stats based merit systems in Europe and Asia. The US system is not perfect but I prefer it. I am a supporter of Affirmative Action as well–even though it may disadvantage my own children int he admissions process–just as their private school educations disadvantage them.</p>
<p>I am willing to accept the social trade-offs because I can see great social advantage to Affirmative Action. Again, it is not a perfect social policy, but I support it nonetheless. I do not support a stirct merit system.</p>
<p>While I have sympathy for individual Asian students who find the bar set so high, I believe Asian and Asian American students are highly represented at American Universities. Overall, I do not believe the Asian American population is suffering due to lack of representation at elite US universities. Indeed, over the next few decades, it will be interesting to note the social contributions of that highly educated Asian American group. </p>
<p>To those who have been given much–much is expected in return.</p>
<p>cheers, good post.
I, too, prefer our imperfect system to the imperfect pattern followed by other countries. Ours reflects our American ideals & values of inclusion, of service beyond personal achievement, and yes, of a diversity of peoples – many of whom are Asian & are quite generously represented in American Universities.</p>
<p>I feel a tiny bit less “sorry” for Asians facing the same high standard that all other applicants face. My reason for that is that there continues to be less (at least self-reported) variety in their college lists than, overall, for other ethnic groups. A couple of years ago there were many Caucasian students from the NE who Saw the Handwriting on the Wall when it came to the “massacres” at Ivies. Many of them had records similar to their Asian counterparts. Lots of them decided to apply ED to non-Ivy schools, or to schools that were not HYPSM at least. </p>
<p>Rankings & reputations are the product of fallible, imperfect human perceptions. The Elites are not responsible for satisfying any family’s unrealistic sense of desperation about college desires, regardless of the race, origin of that family.</p>
<p>cheers,
I don’t think padad has written anything about his citizenship, it was me. Actually the question of citizenship versus permanent residency is not that simple. We know a number of people( not from China) who don’t plan to become US citizens, mainly to simplify the process of visiting their families in the “old country” which would require obtaining a visa for US citizens. I don’t think there was anything in the media about Li’s parent intentions re: US citizenship, so I wouldn’t assume anything.</p>
<p>I’m with parabella.</p>
<p>cheers, you really don’t know whether or not that is true unless you asked Li Jian in person.</p>
<p>Even if he does not intend to become a U.S. citizen, which I highly doubt given that he is a graduate of an American high school and will likely be a graduate of an American elite, it has nothing to do with his complaints, which in my eyes are justified.</p>
<p>fabrizio:
I am not at all sure Li’s particular case is a strong one( assuming there is indeed a discrimination against Asians at Princeton, which I am not convinced is true) . I believe though that by law citizens and permanent residents have the same right to be accepted or rejected by colleges.</p>
<p>Can only speak about a student I know. He is a citizen from Taiwan with a green card. He came here when he was in the 5th grade and lived with his aunt. He is a great math and science student, but very poor in English/Writing. Yet because of his great grades in AP Sciences and Math classes, he is ranked 10 out of 285. He took the TOEFL and was just admitted to Cornell ED. By the way, he is a great person. I just wanted to point out that it doesn’t seem to me that having a green card hurt him.</p>
<p>I have one question. If an underrepresented minority student (could be black, hispanic, or other race but not asian) applied to Princeton University with the same stats as Li have - the same GPA with the same courses, same scores on SAT reasoning and subject tests, same extracurriculars, same impressions on personal statement - for the same term, would the students still be put on the waited-lists and finally be rejected? If so, then it wouldn’t be a problem. If not, then Princeton University is responsible for this.</p>
<p>What do you guys think? Do you guys think this student would still be treated same as Li or not? I personally don’t think PU would reject this student since I believe top notch schools use affirmative action.</p>
<p>sejin,
Judging from response #318 on the College Admissions thread, “I wish I weren’t Asian,” my guess would be that a URM with a profile “identical” to Jian Li’s would be admitted. You might want to go on that thread & ask that of the poster “AdOfficer” directly. Unfortunately it’s not that simple, because supposing other URM’s with similar but not quite identical profiles to Jian Li applied that cycle, with something to consider besides race & economic background (such as, they played a mean percussion for the orchestra)or even Caucasians who were very, very poor, or an unusual Native American (<em>way</em> under-represented) who had an unusual academic emphasis – any of those might have been admitted, we don’t really know. It’s not just a theoretical; you (the admissions committee) have to look at the actuals, not the theoreticals. It’s the applications in front of them – not some predetermined formula or goal. It’s based on current comparisons.</p>
<p>But let’s take your theoretical anyway. I believe the answer would likely be yes: a URM “identical” to Jian Li might have been admitted, with JL waitlisted. Is this “discrimination”? Can JL prove “harm” or “unequal opportunity”? No, in my opinion. (1) JL has been given the chance to compete equally, which is the essence of equal opportunity – to be considered equally, to have equal access for consideration; (2) JL was granted equal outcomes; he was accepted at Yale, a peer institution to Princeton. Legally, therefore, he suffered no “harm.” (So I’m not sure what you mean by, “Princeton is responsible for this.” Even JL acknowledges he didn’t really want to go to P.)</p>
<p>These kinds of decisions are similarly made in employment (for example, in public institutions with a non-prohibited mission to racial inclusion). I, a Caucasian, would be granted a job interview if I qualified for the first steps in the job application process. I might have all the necessary ingredients for the job, & interview well, but equally might a URM. If the URM was equal to me in every respect, the URM might well be granted the job over me. I could not claim discrimination; I was given equal opportunity to apply for & compete for this job. I was not denied access based on my race.</p>
<p>Opportunity does not equal outcomes.</p>
<p>sejin:</p>
<p>If an URM had the background same as Jan Li, all the elites would be drooling over.</p>
<p><if an=“” urm=“” had=“” the=“” background=“” same=“” as=“” jan=“” li,=“” all=“” elites=“” would=“” be=“” drooling=“” over.=“”></if></p>
<p>And if an Asian from South Dakota did, they would be drooling over him, too.</p>
<p>^ Not sure about that.</p>
<p>"Indeed, over the next few decades, it will be interesting to note the social contributions of that highly educated Asian American group. "</p>
<p>cheers you don’t have to wait that long. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16459952/[/url]”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16459952/</a></p>
<p>“To those who have been given much–much is expected in return.”</p>
<p>NOTHING is GIVEN to them. Get off your hoity-toity attitude that Asians are mooching off your system.</p>
<p>But wouldn’t one of the concerns about Asian American contributions - as a social group - be that those contributions might be too narrowly limited to technology? How many spots can or should our elite schools offer to individuals interested in technology/sciences? Why shouldn’t it be our goal to strive for a more egalitarian society by maintaining a “balance” of all races at all levels within society so that there is equal representation at all levels? (setting aside the question of whether AA is the method to accomplish that) How else can we become truly egalitarian? Or is that a goal there is not even any agreement on?</p>