<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?”</p>
<p>some contributors</p>
<p>Famous Asian Pacific Americans
Apolo Ohno: Olympic Gold & Silver Medalist, speed skating
Angela Perez Baraquio: First Asian American Miss America 2001
Bruce Lee: Martial Artist and Actor
Sarah Chang: Violinist
Norman Mineta: US Secretary of Transportation; formerly mayor of San Jose, US Congressman, and US Secretary of Commerce
Elaine Chao: US Secretary of Labor
Gary Locke: Governor of Washington State
Dr. Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar: Nobel Prize winner, evolution of stars, led to modern astrophysics
Ellison Onizuka: Astronaut
Kalpana Chawla: Astronaut, first Indian American woman in space
Jerry Yang: Yahoo! Founder
Dr. David Ho, MD: Medical researcher and 1996 Time Man of the Year
Kristi Yamaguchi: Olympic Gold Medalist, figure skating
Tiger Woods: Golf Pro
Michael Chang: Tennis Pro
Benny Agbayani: Baseball Player, Colorado Rockies
Akebono (Chad Rowan): Sumo Wrestler (retired)
Betty Ong: Flight Attendant who called authorities from American Airlines 11 on 9/11
Dustin Nguyen: Actor
Tia Carerre: Actor
Dean Cain: Actor
Michelle Kwan: Olympic Silver and Bronze medalist, Figure skating
Bose: Bose audio</p>
<p>Simba, that article is amazing. I’m really shocked by those numbers. Talk about continuing the American Dream ideal…</p>
<p>
scansmom, I personally couldn’t care less if career choices are balanced with a representative racial distribution. All I care about is equal opportunity so people of any race can persue whatever fields they wish. Case in point is the Irish. I really don’t believe anyone is still discriminating against them anymore, but large numbers of them are still entering law enforcement & firefighting. That’s a choice they make. Why worry if they are overrepresented in fire departments and underrepresented in museum curators spots?</p>
<p>I also think that the elite schools DO limit spots in tech/science fields. That’s exactly why Asians feel they are being discriminated against. The majority of Asians are vying for a finite number of such spots. Too many highly qualified kids for too few spots. As has been said a hundred times on this thread, if the Asian kid (or any kid) chose a less competitive major, he’d have a better shot at admittance.</p>
<p>Although I might add that such accomplishments are to be more than just applauded; these individuals are very important role models for future generations and greatly needed for ALL minorities but we need more than just token numbers in all areas of life. I do not see how doing away with AA and moving towards a more meritocratic (test score only) system will accomplish this.</p>
<p>How can I…Only last Saturday one of the Old episode was on TV. At first my 19 year old son did not want to watch it. Science Fiction from the 60’s?</p>
<p>But after the episode he liked it…It was about the crew that gets tranported in to the parallel universe - where every one can get ahead by killing their boss.</p>
<p>“but we need more than just token numbers in all areas of life”</p>
<p>It continues to amaze me of the subtle or subconscious racism/bias exhibited here on asian-americans. I would ask the poster to think whether he/she would make statements like Condolezza Rice may be “token numbers” or “role model”. The contribution of asian-americans in this country is at all walk of life. We are a major contributor of ethnic food, sports (ta kwan do, etc), literature (fiction and poetry), science and technology, entertainment (the recent Oscar to Ang Lee is not about directing an asian-based film but an american film). Asian-americans are perhaps perceived only by CC posters here as “narrowly limited”</p>
<p>The issue at hand for Princeton is whether Asian Americans are picked out and discriminated against in the admissions process. They deny it, as do the other selective schools where this “rumor” persists. That the holistic system in place at this colleges ends up being discrimanatory against Asian Americans is not at issue. There are many clusters of kids who do not do as well in the admissions process because of the way admissions works at these schools. Any kids with the profile that many Asian Americans have without some outstanding hook these colleges wants, will be in the same situation even without this ancestry. Once upon a time, kid with these outstanding academic profiles, and often a strong musical talent would have been shoo-ins. Once kids who are now classified as “BWRKs” were ivy bound material. There was a time when legacy meant a near automatic admit. Certain prep schools were once feeder schools to the top colleges. Those days are over. Not to say that these groups still do not enjoy better chances than the standard % o get into these top schools. Kids with top academic stats get in at a far higher percentage than those who are middling in that area. Legacies still enjoy a higher accept rate than the average kid with the same profile. And the top preps still get in more kids to the ivies than the most highschools. The BWRK seems to be the category that has really gotten the shaft, and I think that has pretty much been as a result of the large numbers of Asian students who have the stellar academic profile. It used to be so rare to get perfect SATs (didn’t know a soul in my day). Though still rare, it happens far more often, as the stats clearly show. Grade inflation is rampant now, especially with the weighting of advanced courses, and more kids than ever are taking AP and college level courses while still in highschool. Things have changed, and this change in admissions at selective colleges has not been favorable for kids who are highly academic but have little else the college wants and needs.</p>
<p>A few days ago, the Philadelphia Inquirer did one of those stupid stories on three local kids scoring “perfect” SATs at the last test date. One Jew, two Italians. So it isn’t just Asian kids. I think the score recentering had something to do with it.</p>
<p>Simba, don’t you think that your rebuttal to Cheers is a bit too harsh? And for that matter, your series of rebuttals way too … simplistic as they focus on the sole element of racial discrimination? In your eyes, the ONLY reason Jian Li was not accepted at Princeton was because of his race. Good luck with that at the OCR! </p>
<p>Further, are you so sure that NOTHING has been given to minorities by a nation of immigrants? While you may want to focus on the exact meaning of a GIFT, should you not recognize the ways in which a country, both through its government and the generosity of private citizens and organizations, has build a system that is so … accomodating to immigrants, including the ones who entered through illegal means. And, in this regard, while all the publicity goes to the southern border crossings, one cannot forget the situation of students overstaying their visas among countless other violations. </p>
<p>How can you say that the country has given NOTHING in spite of the numbers of asians in our colleges? I realize that you will say that they EARNED it, especially by refusing to consider the benefits of YEARS of AA that came before receiving (or should I say earning?) the label of model minority. For today’s numbers to exist, there was a need for a system that was both accepting and rewarding. Outside of North America, could you find a single country where the facts debated in this thread could take place? </p>
<p>Of course, it is easier to decry a system when it no longer offers the same benefits. Is sacrificing the cow that no longer provides milk a generous position? Or making sure to pull the ladder up after climbing it? </p>
<p>For the record, it is the overreaching combination of misguided entitlement and claims of superiority through an erroneous concept of meritocracy that PROVOKES the reaction of others. Not the other way around!</p>
<p>“Simba, don’t you think that your rebuttal to Cheers is a bit too harsh?”</p>
<p>Not really. Throughout this discussion I have found subtle but apparent anti Asian bias in her posts. and the two sentences she wrote reads like, OK we GAVE you so much, now let us see how much you can GIVE US BACK.</p>
<p>I personally don’t think simba’s rebuttals are too harsh.</p>
<p>I do agree that there is at least one individual here who exhibits an anti-Asian bias. Of course, par TOS, I can’t name anyone, but that isn’t necessary, anyway. This person is alive and aware.</p>
<p>xiggi, here’s the thing. I speak for myself when I say this.</p>
<p>I do not believe that I’m entitled to anything beyond life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.</p>
<p>And, I also believe that Blacks are not entitled to any preferential treatment just because they were abominably treated in the past.</p>
<p>I think Li Jian said it best when he stated that he didn’t want his race to count for him or against him. That’s my position for sure.</p>
<p>Jian Li is indeed entitled to desire that his race does not count against him. Accordingly it is his right to challenge the decision of Princeton, Harvard, and the other schools who turned him down via a legal challenge. If his claim of discrimination is justified will be established by the OCR. </p>
<p>However, it is not HIS prerogative to decide if and when other’s people race might favor them as established by the Affrmative Action laws. I am not sure if we truly know what Jian Li stated, but it is doubtful that, he truly understood the nature of his complaint. On the other hand, it is obvious that he might have been a lot more selective in selecting his cast of advisers. </p>
<p>Why don’t we wait for the final determination of the OCR?</p>
<p>I wonder if it would help if we had an Asian-American History month the way we have a Black History month. The truth is most of us have learned very little in school about what Asian-Americans have contributed to the country. It’s sort of like the game of naming five famous Canadians. The average American can’t do it.</p>
<p>Mathmom, how 'bout we start with just plain old American History, a history that I find many CC students – including possibly some with “perfect SAT scores,” profoundly lacking in.</p>
<p>Some of the people on this thread had better hope I never become an admission officer at an elite. Not because of any views of inclusion I have expressed here, but because I would be tempted to Admit or Deny partly based on an applicant’s acceptable level of historical knowledge. What exactly <em>are</em> they teaching at TJSST, at Exeter, at Andover, at the other renown publics & privates whose seniors are so anxious for elite college admission? </p>
<p>I am not talking about “AP US History,” which is an intense survey course whose aim is imparting a volume of factual details. I’m talking about a more thoughtful, thought-provoking, analytical understanding of & reflection about the core concepts on which the nation was founded, and the contradictions with which the framers grappled & struggled. I am talking about a deeper appreciation of civil rights than some of the superficial & non-contextual arguments I find here and on College Admissions. Perhaps an Ivy interview would better consist of an oral mini-exam designed to elicit such understanding.</p>
<p>The present is never divorced from the past – the principles of freedom, opportunity, & participation never separate from the denial of the same. Many people on this board have not the vaguest perspective on these relationships. Honor Thy Fathers and Mothers by learning this. Please, students.</p>
<p>And when you visit or live in another country, you will never understand its people(s) or its institutions without a similar knowledge of its past – whether that is Germany, France, England, Japan, China, Korea, Vietnam, Mexico, the Philippines. And the U.S.</p>
<p>Epiphany, the content you suggest is worthy of study, but so are a lot of other things, and they can’t all fit into a high school curriculum.</p>
<p>Even kids who have taken both AP U.S. History and AP American Government (as my daughter did) probably don’t understand the content you’re talking about at the level you would like. Besides the required U.S. history/government courses (or their AP alternatives), there don’t seem to be any other opportunities in the current curriculum to introduce these topics. If kids were to have a U.S. history/government course at the level you suggest, something else would have to be dropped from the curriculum. What would it be?</p>