<p>“their numbers are being unfairly contained in the name of ‘holistic’ admission factors.”</p>
<p>I rest my case. Indeed, that’s the belief: containment is “unfair.” That’s right, unfair. Colleges in the U.S. do not get to contain any particular group. Rather, they must agree to the “qualification” factors that any particular group dictates, regardless of where that dictation emanates, & regardless of how unbalanced in background their student body becomes. Many years ago, btw, that dictation of how & whom to contain came from the dominant WASP culture of the elites. The Elites have long since rejected any model that thus overly imbalances the student body.</p>
<p>tokenadult, yes that’s true about Caltech, but naturally the content of the academics are not as universally appealing as other rigorous institutions. I think that’s one of the underlying issues here, which the OP was trying to address implcitly.</p>
<p>This question of “containment” gets very hairy, though. What if the study cited above is true, and the number of Asians is being depressed not by preference for white students, but preference for African-American and Hispanic students? That wouldn’t be “containment,” would it? I think there is a qualitative difference between “too many Asians” and “not enough blacks.”</p>
<p>But that’s the myth, Hunt. Asians lose most to other Asians, not to blacks. There’s a very small (not appreciable) factor of middle class students from <em>all</em> non-black backgrounds losing minimally to middle-class blacks, but it as not as big a factor as some would believe, & certainly not as big a factor as Asians vs. Asians + Anglo Caucasians within the same economic class.</p>
<p>Wouldn’t a better phrased proposition start with “What if the study cited above WERE true”? Simulated projections are not necessarily the same as … data. </p>
<p>Do the racial distributions of college students since 1960 show an *erosion *of the asian population in prestigious colleges? How do the distributions in prestigious colleges espouse the national racial distributions? Care to graph the changes between White and Asian students? And then add other minorities? </p>
<p>There is no need to study the effect of selfishness and misguided notions of entitlement. It permeates all similar discussions on CC!</p>
<p>I’m not sure what you’re saying, epiphany. I don’t understand the significance of the point thaat Asians lose most to other Asians. Isn’t it the case that affirmative action for URMs disadvantages somebody? Aside from whether it’s a good idea or a bad idea, it must have an impact. The study somebody quoted above suggests that the impact may be greater on Asian applicants than on white applicants. I understand xiggi’s point, I think, which is that the study is based on stats, and colleges use holistic admissions, and therefore he doesn’t believe that the results of the study reflect what is really happening. But what happened when the UCs stopped considering race? Did the proportions of white and Asian admitted students change at the same rate?</p>
<p>Isn’t a large part of the UC admissions formula the SATII scores? I believe that Asians who come from homes where Korean, Chinese, and Japanese is spoken have a huge advantage here, correct? Most students of European ancestry don’t speak French or Spanish at home, so that could have an impact on proportions of non Asian admissions.</p>
<p>Epiphany: “Again, though, as I said earlier, it is my observation from the many East Asians I know, that they are relieved not to compete only with equally ambitious, singly focused students (which they would in their homeland); thus, the U.S. is a better choice for them. That’s why I think there’s a bit of hypocrisy in the position of those Asian American students who complain about things like score standards in U.S. University admissions. They want it both ways: they want to compete with their admissions expectations but on someone else’s turf. They believe, or have believed, they’ll have an advantage in that regard. However, they have not taken into account the number of applicants quite similar to themselves. (And how Elites loathe too much similarity.)”</p>
<p>I’ll agree with this. All of my friends who have gone back to India with their children from US public schools have had very hard time adjusting back in Indian top private schools. Getting into top professional public school for these children won’t be an option. I know it for sure but would like to add that it is easier to prepare for one test as it is back in India than to be prepared for subjective evaluation. The subjective evaluation will change from person to person and so no one can be 100% sure. While cracking one test can be 100% sure. That is what I think bothered most of Indian parent I know. The uncertainity in the college admission process.
But that is life. We can only make our D prepare for the worst. If everthing good happen then she will enjoy the best but in case everything worst happen then also she should be prepared to live happily is the motto.</p>
<p>In 1960, there were still odious immigration restrictions that made the Asian-American population tiny indeed compared to the immigrant population from the western Hemisphere. The more apt comparison is to look at available PREPARED college applicants compared to admitted applicants in whatever group is of interest. I won’t go there in defining what would be “fair,” as I think that is debatable, but I will encourage participants here to take a look at section III of the ACT National Report (the section on college readiness) </p>
<p>and to suggest, please, any other data that bear on the issue of college readiness. I haven’t made my mind up about what is fair, but I want to gather data to figure out what meaningful differences there may or may not be in admission probability by ethnicity.</p>
<p>America is Eurocentric? Maybe I’ve been living under a rock for the last 50 years, but I don’t see it. If anything, we seem much more focussed on and influenced by the “East.” Europe is so passe. :)</p>
<p>“Why is that the Jewish population at these schools are so much higher than their actual population?”</p>
<p>The relevant comparison isn’t the population as a whole; it’s the % of the population applying to college who is a particular race, ethnicity or religion. If Jews are 3% of the country, but comprise 18% of those applying to college, then to find that they comprise 18% of those at elite colleges wouldn’t mean that they were overrepresented.</p>
<p>^^^: Then that should apply to Asian students too; even if there are less than 3% asian as percentage of population the college ready asian students exceeds 15% so Asian should not be considered as overrepresented at the Ivies then.</p>
<p>paying3tuitions asks, “why isn’t there an Asian University” akin to Brandeis?</p>
<p>Response: Brandeis was formed because many universities actually was limiting Jewish enrollment to their approximate representation in the population. However, today, Asian Americans (although I guess there is a question as to who qualifies as Asian), are represented among top universities well above their proportion to the population. This was and is a major difference from what happened to Jews.</p>
<p>Token, I believe that you’re absolutely correct in focusing on deeper analyses of the pool of students applying to every school in the country and then refocusing on the small world of super selective schools.</p>
<p>The greatest danger when looking at PERCENTAGES is that it masks the issue of the NUMBER of students. Case in point: compare the total N (for number) for asians and white students. Further when looking at national data for the ACT and SAT, it is important to QUANTIFY the number of students who score above 700 or 750 on the SAT. How many Asians students do indeed score above 750 on the verbal components of the SAT compared to white students? With that information on hand, you can then compare how a pool of several thousands white high scores fare at the HYPS and how a MUCH SMALLER pool of Asians fare. </p>
<p>If we were to listen to a few loudmouths who are quicker to cry about discrimination than to use real data, Asians are supposed to have a quasi-monopoly on perfect GPA and scores. The reality is that a study of average scores and scores distribution show a VERY slight advantage on certain parts of the SAT and ACT and none in others. </p>
<p>Looking at the very broad numbers of the Ivy League, how many applications should we assume were from asian students? 40,000? 50,000? 60,000? How many asian students score above 1500 on the SAT again?</p>
<p>How many asian students ended up enrolling at a top-25 university or top-25 LAC? What is the percentage of asian students who were kept away from ANY of those schools? </p>
<p>All the noise about discrimination is nothing more than a testament to the funnel vision of many applicants who cling to faulty assumptions.</p>
<p>“However, today, Asian Americans (although I guess there is a question as to who qualifies as Asian), are represented among top universities well above their proportion to the population. This was and is a major difference from what happened to Jews.”</p>
<p>What some Asians think is happening, though, is not that different. They think that their numbers in top schools are being artificially limited to prevent “too many Asians” from getting in. This is not that different from what clearly did happen to Jews. The difficulty this time is that it may not be happening at all.</p>
<p>The bulk of posters here also happened to get into one or more of the reach schools. Only once in a blue moon where you see a student being rejected everywhere. So I’d say they know what they’re doing and understand the admissions game fine. What are ECs, number of APs, prep courses for SAT? Aren’t those chess pieces students are playing in the admissions game?</p>
<p>I think looking at the OPs question primarily as implementing purely stats-based admissions is only one subset of issues raised by high-achieving Asian-Americans. I have no problem with going beyond stats and looking at extracurriculars and other factors (other than if it becomes a convenient way to disguise and implement quota ceilings as it apparently was in the past). Most people would agree that its in fact desirable to go beyond stats, and its not likely that most colleges will get away from this approach. So to me its a less interesting question as to what would happen if an admissions process were purely stat-based.</p>
<p>The larger question (at least in my opinion) that occurs to me from the OPs post, however, is whether there is an implicit discomfort with and perhaps a bias against - a high % of Asian-Americans at a college. In other words, is there an underlying preference among admissions committees against having too many Asians? To think about it another way, if a white and an Asian-American candidate were highly similar in terms of stats, types of extracurriculars etc., would they have the same chance of getting into a top school? Ideally, to my thinking, there should be no reason to distinguish between Asian-Americans and white Americans, since neither of them are URMs. But Im not sure that this is the case.</p>
<p>If interesteddad is correct (post # 27) that each of the four major ethnic groups he mentions have their own boxes within which they essentially compete, that is quite revealing. I have no problem with disadvantaged groups such as Hispanic-Americans and African-Americans being evaluated separately (there are also often problems with the way that is done, but thats a separate issue). But I really see no reason to prima facie distinguish between white and Asian Americans (just as theres no reason to distinguish between Jewish applicants and non-Jewish applicants and wasnt in the days when the Ivies felt there were too many Jews). If being say Polish-American or Asian-American (or Jewish) somehow made a big difference to an applicants development or sense of self, the essays would be the place to bring that out. </p>
<p>I actually doubt that the application process involves putting white and Asian-Americans into separate boxes explicitly, since that is pretty much a de facto establishment of quotas and Im guessing may be subject to legal challenge. But I wouldnt be surprised if there is an implicit sorting of the kind that interesteddad describes.</p>
<p>I believe this to be true, based only on my intuition and life experience. However, I do not think the sentiment is reserved for Asian applicants. I think there is a “tipping point” at which a campus will be considered too-Asian, too-Hispanic, too-White, too-Black, too-female, too-male, etc., and thereby deter students of other races/genders from applying. I don’t think it is a “conscious” racial prejudice per se, but rather a point at which each student feels that s/he will be comfortable in that environment. I.e., that s/he will find enough friends and classmates who share similar interests and backgrounds.</p>
<p>My guess is that many u’s are attempting to reach a racial balance in their student population that creates an attractive environment for applicants of every race.</p>
<p>^^^: Then that should apply to Asian students too; even if there are less than 3% asian as percentage of population the college ready asian students exceeds 15% so Asian should not be considered as overrepresented at the Ivies then.>></p>
<p>Absolutely. I don’t think anyone can truly say that they are overrepresented. I think the thing is that many of Asian background seem to not fully get that there is not room for everyone who is qualified, so if they have the stats that put them in the running for an elite school but don’t get in to a particular elite school, it’s “unfair.”</p>
<p>“The larger question (at least in my opinion) that occurs to me from the OP’s post, however, is whether there is an implicit discomfort with – and perhaps a bias against - a high % of Asian-Americans at a college. In other words, is there an underlying preference among admissions committees against having “too many Asians”? To think about it another way, if a white and an Asian-American candidate were highly similar in terms of stats, types of extracurriculars etc., would they have the same chance of getting into a top school? Ideally, to my thinking, there should be no reason to distinguish between Asian-Americans and white Americans, since neither of them are URMs. But I’m not sure that this is the case.”</p>
<p>Right, there is no reason to differentiate between the two. Nonetheless, part of the college’s desire is to bring some level of diversity to the class. Maybe there’s a harp player and an oboe player and the school already has a harp player, so they give the nod to the oboe player. Is that really discrimination against harp players? All qualified harp players can’t be let in.</p>
<p>Maybe the real solution is just to triple the sizes of all the elite schools so more kids can go to them :-)</p>