"Race" in College Admissions FAQ & Discussion 4

Applying to College
661

<p>^ ^ ^ ^ ^ </p>

<p>u§ername responded to my reply to another participant: </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I was responding to a question about what’s “fair,” not to a question about personal advantage. Colleges don’t publish information in sufficient detail to be sure in all cases what is personally advantageous, nor HOW personally advantageous self-designating a race or ethnicity is. But the number of students who decline to self-identify is large, [many</a> of those students are admitted to selective colleges](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062865329-post4.html]many”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062865329-post4.html), and I get the preliminary sense, as an overall national phenomenon, that most such applicants have about the same admission odds as the majority of the application pool, that is as the “white” part of the pool. </p>

<p>You have correctly noted that I observe that [some</a> people simply just want to be regarded human](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062907620-post72.html]some”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062907620-post72.html). I would add here, relating this to the idea of personal advantage, that it is in the long-term personal advantage of EVERYONE to live in a society in which people are treated as individuals rather than en bloc as members of approximately defined groups. The civil wars in Lebanon, Sri Lanka, Rwanda, and the former Yugoslavia show the folly of government policies that rigidly categorize people by ethnic groups. That tends to cause countries to split into warring groups and ■■■■■■■ social progress.</p>

662

<p>wow, I think my post was moved by a mod. I think I would remember if I posted in this particular thread. </p>

<p>I’m sorry if my question was not clear. I am genetically 1/4 inuit, but since I was displaced, to Indonesia of all places, where you NEVER meet another Inuk (and see mostly just Chinese people), I cannot claim tribal ties. But that doesn’t mean I get to just wipe out that 1/4. </p>

<p>My particular question is, does anyone know of existing paperwork that I must complete to be able to claim “Alaskan Native” on the Common App?</p>

663

<p>

</p>

<p>There probably is some kind of registration process in Alaska, which should be searchable on the Internet. I think you may have answered your own question, however, because it doesn’t appear that you “maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment,” which is part of the federal definition for being an Alaskan native. A college, especially Yale, is quite likely to ask for specifics about this.</p>

664

<p>

</p>

<p>There aren’t any official statistics on the issue. You could ask colleges and see what they say. </p>

<p>Here’s one press report I saw last year: </p>

<p>[News:</a> Why More Colleges Want Jewish Students - Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/29/jewish]News:”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/29/jewish) </p>

<p>I don’t know how well this article reflects reality, nor do I know how it relates to the colleges you are most interested in.</p>

665

<p>Why is AA such a black/white issue when white females gain the biggest benefit from it?</p>

666

<p>

</p>

<p>Jews are probably overrepresented at colleges, but since they’re lumped in with “white”, I don’t think colleges really care.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>lol no</p>

<p>Colleges don’t want any more female applicants so they can keep their sex ratios equal.</p>

667

<p>Hey guys,</p>

<p>I am half white and half Cuban; I’m Cuban-American by ethinicity. </p>

<p>Would it be to my advantage/disadvantage to check the ‘Hispanic’ box when applyinig to colleges, or should I just check the norm- ‘White’?</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

668

<p>You may select both Hispanic and White on the new Common Application.</p>

669

<p>check hispanic if you want to benefit from affirmative action and have an easier time getting into college.</p>

670

<p>The question of one’s being Hispanic and his or her race is separate on the Common Application.</p>

671

<p><a href=“%5Burl=http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1063080411-post669.html]#669[/url]”>quote</a> …You have correctly noted that I observe that [some</a> people simply just want to be regarded human](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062907620-post72.html]some”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062907620-post72.html). I would add here, relating this to the idea of personal advantage, that it is in the long-term personal advantage of EVERYONE to live in a society in which people are treated as individuals rather than en bloc as members of approximately defined groups. The civil wars in Lebanon, Sri Lanka, Rwanda, and the former Yugoslavia show the folly of government policies that rigidly categorize people by ethnic groups. That tends to cause countries to split into warring groups and ■■■■■■■ social progress.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The college application process is one of the first rites of passage into young adulthood. It’s an opportunity to communicate to a college just how the applicant wants to be evaluated with regard to ‘race’. By not filling out the ‘Race/Ethnicity’ section of the application, the applicant is in essence saying, “Evaluate me on the merits detailed in this application and not as a member of a social group”. And, as [argued[/url</a>], like-minded applicants can deny college administrators the ‘data’/misinformation they currently utilize for their admittance policies that have the unintended consequence of fostering division; in essence throwing a wrench in the statistical-gathering machinery.</p>

<p>[T]okenadult [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1063080411-post669.html]details[/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1063080411-post669.html]details[/url</a>] an excellent consideration for an applicant availing him/her-self of this option/opportunity. Here’s another consideration for student’s that are about to embark on an intellectual journey, post-secondary education, that hopefully will train the mind to question assumptions and develop critical thinking skills. From a [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062154595-post54.html]previous”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062154595-post54.html]previous</a> post](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1060188569-post733.html]argued[/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1060188569-post733.html):</p>

<p>

</p>

672

<p>

</p>

<p>The reality is that science, with a good deal of discomfort and some soul-searching, is bringing us back to the 19th century.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The Geocentric Model is a great example of entirely correct model formation by people using observations with their own eyes. The sun and moon indeed can be well described as going around the earth. The planets indeed execute periodic motions. Epicycles (under a different terminology and notation) remain, today, the standard mathematics for describing general motions of that type.</p>

<p>The Geocentric Model is superseded by other models (ellipses, inverse-square laws, full general-relativistic N-body problem) only at data resolutions far higher than observable by the naked eye. That’s very different from being wrong, or an example of faulty reasoning.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Kepler, Newton, and their successors in no way undermined the usefulness (or the correctness) of the geocentric model as an effective approximation. Anyone who simply IGNORED the geocentric models in astronomy today would be politely known as an “idiot”; deliberately excluding most of the important low-resolution observable phenomena (circular daily paths of the sun, moon and other heavenly bodies) based on a deluded notion that they are wrong or unscientific. </p>

<p>Physicists didn’t throw out classical mechanics when updates became available. The “incorrect” pre-relativistic, pre-quantum theories are required study material for anyone studying physics, and at most energy and distance scales, they predominate over the effects discovered later. The social-race equivalent would be to require biologists to spend a great deal of time studying 19th century ethnology (as a serious warm-up theory, not a bullseye to attack) before getting to the DNA ancestry tree. I don’t think that’s quite the point you wished to make, but it is where the logic happens to lead.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, it is informing us that race (no quotation marks) has high-resolution, DNA-level biological reality that is largely the same as the the lower-resolution, personally observable data with its social “race” labels. You were informed of some of this in the last thread, with references to scientific papers. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Specifically, what incorrect premises do you claim social race labelling relies upon?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Epicycles, in their modern (and equivalent) mathematical guise, are still going strong. Isn’t it amazing that the ancients hit upon such an efficient and long-lived tool for describing regular motions?</p>

673

<p>Regardless of Affirmative Action, I would say select both for honesty, as it would probably be worse in the long run to lie on your application. But if you personally identify w/one ethnicity over another, select that one.</p>

674

<p>Go to the Hispanic Students subforum and read the sticky thread at the top about Hispanic/Latino defined.</p>

675

<p><a href=“%5Burl=http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1063083087-post680.html]#680[/url]”>quote</a> Specifically, what incorrect premises do you claim social race labelling relies upon?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The premises referenced in the post’s link to studies in "[anthropology</a>, biology, psychology…](<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1060826901-post63.html]anthropology"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1060826901-post63.html)". More specifically, the [American</a> Anthropological Association Statement on “Race”](<a href=“http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm]American”>http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm): </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>And more to the point, this from the the [U.S&lt;/a&gt;. Department of Energy’s Human Genome Program/Human Genome Project](<a href=“Human Genome Project Information Site Has Been Updated”>Human Genome Project Information Site Has Been Updated): </p>

<p>

</p>

676

<p>As the Office of Management and Budget said when it revised federal race and ethnicity classifications to their current form, </p>

<p>[Revisions</a> to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity](<a href=“http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/rewrite/fedreg/ombdir15.html]Revisions”>http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/rewrite/fedreg/ombdir15.html) </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>And as the Census Bureau reports in its more detailed descriptions of each category, </p>

<p>[Black</a> or African American persons, percent, 2000](<a href=“http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm]Black”>http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm) </p>

<p>

</p>

677

<p>I’m divided on this issue.
My mom’s family is from South America, and my grandpa had to work for two years in this country in order to afford legal transportation for his family.
In the meantime, my mom and her sisters grew up without any male-figure at home, and they had no chance to have a childhood.
I feel that there is some struggle which exists in the underrepresented population.</p>

<p>On the other hand, I do believe that admissions should look at the merits first, concentrating on whether the student can succeed academically at the school. Race should not be a determining factor, but rather be a factor that simply is considered and possibly be used so that a final decision is assessed.</p>

678

<p>

</p>

<p>Not sure why you feel it’s necessary to use “should.” This is indeed how admissions works, exactly the way you describe. The institutions that consider URM status are not interested in students who cannot do the work or barely can do the work. (Too much risk involved.) But a lot goes into examining if any particular student can do the work (more than just a single data point on a graph). As with non-URM’s, it’s a constellation of factors.</p>

679

<p>I used ‘should’ because of the apparent discrepancies between the accepted stats of ORMs and those of URMs.
In those cases, it seems as if the school is merely trying to achieve a diverse, balanced community that has people of different origins.</p>

680

<p>Akrana, the school is never “merely” trying to achieve diversity, ever. With the numbers of highly qualified applicant from so many corners of the world, the most competitive U’s are hardly in a position to stretch for qualified applicants. The difference is in your perception of what constitutes qualified. Qualified is not a data point, as I tried to explain. Qualified is a composite of academic indicators, when it comes to URM’s and ORM’s and “over-represented” majorities. In fact, by mere statistical measures alone, generally the least “stat”- qualified are found not in minority populations of any kind but in majority populations of wealthy contributors, wealthy legacies, development admits. Those are the ones marginally qualified, in some cases. Celebrity admits, while in some cases immensely qualified (such as the Hughes sisters), are occasionally also admitted due to status, and again in those cases they are mainly Caucasian Anglo. </p>

<p>There is an artificial assumption created by students that a higher score = better qualification, when American U’s use a composite of factors to determine qualification for <em>their</em> broad programs of <em>their</em> Universities, not a science or tech U in India or China. It is not a narrow measurement of whether you can perform on a 3-hr. test, but whether additionally you can write well, think well, have demonstrated that over a 4-yr high school period, etc., and whether you are independently motivated to pursue areas of personal advancement outside what will appear on a transcript.</p>

<p>They’re not admitting 1400-score, 2.9 gpa students. And the number of students who are even below a 3.8 and a 2100 on any given Ivy (for example) campus are not signficant enough to affect admissions for the much larger number who exceed those stats. Rather, the super-qualified are competing with each other on anywhere from 9 to 12 measures of achievement combined with a balanced class of students.</p>

<p>“Seems” is a surface perception, not justified by the results of the exceptionally qualified classes at all the very top U’s in this country.</p>