Exactly, which is why I dislike the idea of racial groups in the first place and why I feel that racial AA should be eliminated.</p>
<p>
First of all, I am referring to the admissions process. Are you suggesting that blacks face racism in terms of the admissions process?
Actually, I will answer that for you: yes. Racial AA discriminates against Asians, but it also manifests the idea that African-Americans are incapable of gaining admissions into top schools without their ethnicity, thus placing African-Americans on a lower level by lowering overall admissions standards.</p>
<p>
Yep, racial AA connotes the idea that URMs are inferior as I’ve mentioned above.
And once again, you would be a fool to deny that there are more ORMs with extraordinary academic merits than there are URMs with the same qualifications.
<a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/sat_percentile_ranks_2008_cr_m_w_gender_ethnic_groups.pdf[/url]”>Higher Education Professionals | College Board;
And let’s not get picky about SAT scores inadequately measuring intelligence, because that is not what I’m trying to argue. I am trying to argue that there are fewer qualified URMs than there are qualified ORMs because the SAT is a direct factor in terms of qualifications at any elite college.
<p>Go to the race thread; it deals with everything concerning race and college admissions.</p>
<p>Officially, no college is going to say “URMs can totally have lower scores”, but most competitive colleges take race into account, so the answer is no, you don’t. Some noticeable exceptions are the UC system and U Michigan.</p>
<p>I figured AA only came into play when you had two equally qualified applicants - one of which was, let’s say, Caucasian, and the other was, let’s say, Native American. So if an Asian (hypothetically) had near perfect standardized test scores, but an African American had decent scores (decent realistically; not by CC’s standards), a college would be more prone to accepting the African American applicant if they have already admitted too many Asians?</p>
<p>^^^I know this is not true for ls admissions, although it may be true on the undergrad level (I doubt it). </p>
<p>Take this for example. It turns out that someone at U Chicago law review crunched the numbers and figured out how many black students would be admitted to top 14 law schools each year without AA, and then compared that number to how many are admitted. Since ls admissions are much more objective than undergrad admissions that is fairly easy to do.</p>
<p>Exactly. There is a DIFFERENCE between “he’s Asian, we’re not going to let him in, we have too many Asians already” and “she’s African American and while she has lower scores, in the context of her environment they are impressive and we believe she is a diamond in the rough.”</p>
<p>So why doesn’t some well-to-do Asian start an Asian-only private college? And see how many people flock there? Uh, part of the reason Asians want to go to certain colleges is precisely because they believe that there they are going to mingle with the hoi polloi of American society and thus make the fabled, storied “connections.”</p>
Except the circumstances of each applicant matter little as long as they are an URM. Blacks from rich families get an AA boost just like those from poor families. Also, the majority of blacks attending schools like HYP are not the descendants of slaves. They are the children of immigrants from other countries.</p>
<p>That sounds like an excellent idea, especially in view of the several recent posts in this thread that lump individual human beings into categories that manifestly don’t fit their actual behavior. </p>
<p>What I haven’t seen in this discussion, yet, are carefully gathered figures about APPLICANTS (as contrasted with enrolled students) by “race” or ethnicity category at the various colleges named above. Even less have I seen recent, carefully gathered figures distinguishing “lottery ticket” applicants from applicants who would be expected to have a decent chance of admission, grouped by those ethic categories.</p>
<p>From the merged thread that posed this question, now shuffled into this main FAQ and discussion thread: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Very few colleges give a simple, straightforward answer to this question. Many colleges admit the great majority of all applicants who apply. (Most colleges are not particularly selective by any criterion: not scores, not grades, not anything except perhaps willingness to pay tuition.) </p>
<p>At this time of year, it would be good to write to several colleges of interest to you and ask this question directly.</p>
<p>Possibly someone who knows the difference between anyway and anyways, for starters.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They are not chosen/not chosen because of race. However, if members of a particular racial group overwhelm the application pool, and have already been offered admission to that very elite U in hugely larger percentages than any other applicant population (not national population – applicant population), a private institution has a right to say, We’d like a little variety here. Therefore, we will also choose other people equally qualified from other ethnic backgrounds, because a campus of one dominant culture is b.o.r.i.n.g. and the other backgrounds will not come here if there is not a great deal of variety – nor, for that matter will some of the best from that dominant culture want to hang out with such little variety, either.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All of the posters who never reference qualified whites being denied acceptance. Clue: qualified applicants of all backgrounds are denied acceptance. You don’t believe it, but I don’t care. Qualified Asians, qualified non-Asians, qualifed lots of people. Get used to it. It’s not a racial conspiracy. Asians are generously, strongly, happily admitted to elites, by all the elites. Check the numbers & quit imagining things. But two things are true: Asians are NOT more qualified than every single non-Asian applying to every elite U. The argumentation here implies that. Probably 80% of them are AS qualified as most other applicants, just as (according to what ad reps say), about 80% of Caucasians are as qualified as most other applicants. But apparently those U’s think that 80% of neither group are eye-popping qualified. Still, I will guarantee you, according both to statistics and to lots of information provided by admissions reps long before you came to CC, way more Asians, proportionally, are offered slots at Elites than any other group. In other words, they CONTINUE to be over-represented vs. application numbers. But that’s not good enough: you want to OWN the Elites by some kind of weird prerogative/entitlement thing. </p>
<p>Again, almost none of you have spent (obviously) any significant amount of time at any Ivy League campus. All of your posing about just how bloody over-qualified Asians are compared to every other group is just not borne out by the evidence. There’s lots of talent there, just as there is lots of talent in many other groups. And the campuses want variety – long before the question of URM’s comes into the picture. URM’s are a tiny, tiny portion of it. And every statistic bears out that Asians are mostly “hurt” (affected) in applications by other Asians against whom they need to distinguish themselves in order not to be viewed as one more science/math major with very similar goals to 75% of their competition. The whole URM thing is a red herring. They’re not comparing you to URM’s or “choosing” URM’s over you. They’re choosing slightly even more fascinating & accomplished students from the same ethnic category as you. Same thing happens to Caucasians, but of course, when it happens to them, it’s fair. </p>
<p>^^Of course the Asian population is dissatisfied with its admissions results at elite public universities. Studies have clearly indicated that in a racially-blind situation, acceptance rates for Asians at top schools jump from 18 to 23%, nearly a 30% increase, whereas acceptance rates for Caucasians remain the same and acceptance rates for URMs significantly dip.</p>
<p>If you want to just observe a somewhat more accurate portrayal of an undistorted top-tier population, look no further than Berkeley. 43% of its students are Asians, as Berkeley is forbidden from practicing AA. I’m not saying 43% is the number it should be at in most top universities, but the fact remains that qualified Asians are still not getting their due.</p>
<p>To make an analogy to:
Suppose your normal week of work consists of 30 hours, and your salary is $1,000 per week. Let’s say you increase your workload to 50 hours/week over the next 6 months, hoping to earn a significant raise. Your boss finally takes notice and raises your weekly salary to $1,002.</p>
<p>Would you be happy? No? But, you earned more money than you did before, so why aren’t you elated?</p>
<p>I realize this isn’t a perfect analogy, but it definitely can be applied.</p>
<p>I don’t have the statistics, but I remember that Asians have the lowest acceptance rate of any racial group.</p>
<p>We want to “OWN” the “Elites”? This is the most preposterous thing I’ve heard all day. Yes, Asian parents do want their kids to get into the Ivy League, but they don’t care much at all for what other parents do. Also, why should what random other people who happen to be in my same “race” affect how people decide my application?</p>