<p>Midmo, professors have no connection to admissions - except for an occasional letter supporting an applicant that may or may not be ignored.</p>
<p>“Furthermore, many have come to the conclusion, based on zero evidence, that he is spoiled, arrogant, racist, one-dimensional, etc.”</p>
<p>While it is true that there is such evidence about him, unfortunately there is plenty about his tacit advisers who have taken advantage of an extremely naive and influencable young person. </p>
<p>Regarding the right to file a complaint with the OCR, there is a difference between decrying the merits of the complaint and discussing the right to file one. For the record, I believe that Jian Li seriously undermined his case by complaining solely about Princeton, as well as visibly misunderstanding the scope of the Espenschade studies. Had he filed multiple complaints against all the schools that rejected him, the OCR may have been forced to look at comparative data about admissions. Right now, the sole case against Princeton will probably been dismissed without much ado since Princeton should be able to establish --quite easily-- that their holistic admission policies transcend the mere SAT scores and ranking. </p>
<p>Lastly, I believe that anyone who expect this case to cause an explosion in the Ivy League will be very disappointed. The public results of the OCR findings will not amount to much at all. However, this will not fail to establish that evidence of discrimination against Asians is far from conclusive.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I’d rather put Asian than white if I don’t fit the stereotype of “Asian”. If I did fit the stereotype I’d put white…]</p>
<p>Thank you! It takes the wisdom of a 16 year old to get it right: all admissions depend the specifics of the individual situation. To your point above, I would also add that checking the box might also depend on the specific college. There are many colleges and universities that don’t get many Asian American applicants and would offer a decided boost in admissions for a highly qualified Asian Am candidate.</p>
<p>Asian Americans are no different than any other applicant. Successful college apps start with assessing what you are selling and which colleges are in the market to buy what you are selling.</p>
<p>It’s not rocket science. For example, it does not take a lot of sophisticated analysis to guess that Princeton is probably not desperate to enroll more Jersey kids.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just look at the enrollment percentages at selective schools, since affirmative action began in the 1960s.</p>
<p>Big gainers: African American, Latino/a, Asian American, and females</p>
<p>Big losers: White and male</p>
<p>It’s not that hard to see that every minority or female slot has been taken directly from white males – who basically had ALL of the slots in 1960. </p>
<p>My daughter’s school only had 52% white US students in this year’s first year fall class. A majority of the acceptance letters went to non-white and/or non-US applicants.</p>
<p>Scansmom states that Asians are “being compared as a class - to whites - at a higher standard.” I see no evidence for this at all.</p>
<p>Marian states, “Musical accomplishments somehow don’t “count” as much for Asians because instrumental music is a stereotypically Asian activity.” Again, is this something you can prove, or just a gut feeling?</p>
<p>My white d does plenty of stereotypical Asian ECs. She has Asian-caliber academic stats & course selections. I can’t imagine any college will give her a boost because she is a white violinist with high GPA, rather than Asian. There are simply far too many smart violinists of ALL races for that talent to be a hook at an elite school. Something else that catches the attention of the admissions people will have to work in her favor if she shoots for an elite. Same for the Asian kids.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was talking about the kids’ perception that this is true. Whether or not it actually is true is something I’m not in a position to find out.</p>
<p>Sorry, Marian. It is a perception that is spreading, isn’t it? I don’t think Li’s complaint can find the truth, though. Was it kluge, or someone else, who posted earlier that the only way to judge if Li’s application was handled fairly is to recreate the entire applicant pool & have the admissions counselors who made the cuts explain the rationale behind their decisions. That’s impossible.</p>
<p>Interestedad, I don’t want to put words in your mouth.</p>
<p>"Interesteddad, are you saying that the study was strictly theoretical and whites are affected as much by AA as Asians in the real world at Princeton admissions.</p>
<p>Is your answer yes?</p>
<p>Interesteddad, you dont get it. Your post at 10:47 doesn’t disprove discrimination. Jonri explained why earlier. </p>
<p>Look. Don’t ask me. Ask somebody you know. Ask somebody at Swarthmore.</p>
<p>SS: I did not say that I believe that Asians are being compared as a class to whites at a higher standard. What I am saying is that if Li (or any other Asian in a similar position) is going to complain about anything, that is the kind of claim they should be making more from a legal perspective, as opposed to basing their complaint on affirmative action. I was not suggesting that such a claim has any merit; in fact, I also said that he did not have any hard evidence to prove such a claim.</p>
<p>
I seriously doubt that this is the case, and it is NOT what I mean in my posts concerning diversity and the holistic nature of the selection process. I think the problem with the “stereotypically Asian” things is that the schools have too many applicants of all types who fit that profile: high achieving student from a highly competitive northeastern high school in a privileged suburban community; pre-med or engineering orientation; plays musical instrument. I don’t think the ad coms care whether that student is Asian, Jewish, or white – thought they may give a diversity boost if the kid fits a URM category. The problem is that Princeton doesn’t want to draw its class from Livingston High and its clones – the exact same profile (including ethnicity) coming from South Dakota might have had a very different outcome.</p>
<p>The problem that Li had with his claim against Princeton is that last year they chose a different Asian from his high school over him. It’s not that the ad coms are trying to cast against type – its that they simply have too many applications of the same types coming from the same set of high schools. The most determinitive piece of information that a student could have would be the Naviance scattergram from his own high school and the historic record of number of students admitted annually from that high school at a given Ivy. If Princeton historically accepted 6 each year from Livingston, and then in 2006 accepted only 1 or 2 white kids with similar profiles but lesser stats than Li, that might be a starting point for investigation – but that doesn’t appear to be the case. What we do know at this point is that one student from Livingston matriculated to Princeton this fall, and that student happens to be a Chinese immigrant who is female.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Only if race and other tip factors were included in the scattergrams.</p>
<p>Well, investigators could easily ascertain the race and tip factors through a subpena of school records. The point is that the scattergrams would be the first place to get a sense of admission patterns for that school. We do know that Princeton has accepted other Asians from Livingston from the past, including an Asian student this year, and that Li apparently tried to contact a non-Asian admitted in a previous year to ask for GPA and SAT score, but was rebuffed. To show discrimination, I think that Li would have to first establish that the circumstances of his being waitlisted is in some way indicative of discrimination – for example, by evidence that in past years Princeton has accepted many more students from his school with lesser stats than he has. I think that’s unlikely given the matriculation report that we do have from the Livingston web site (showing 6 kids overall attending Ivies, with only one each to HYP).</p>
<p>Calmom, I must have missed it. Where did you see that the other accepted student from Li’s high school was Asian?</p>
<p>“I don’t think the ad coms care whether that student is Asian, Jewish, or white – thought they may give a diversity boost if the kid fits a URM category.”</p>
<p>Exactly.</p>
<p>From the Daily Princetonian article, linked in the OP:</p>
<p>
</code></pre>
<p>Thanks, Marite!</p>
<p>“Jonri explained why earlier.”</p>
<p>That is hardly the case; Jonri did not explain a darn thing, but only speculated and opined.</p>
<p>Xiggi, you’re putting me on, right?</p>
<p>If not, you should have gone to Berkeley instead of Claremont.</p>
<p>OK. I’m kidding. </p>
<p>OK. I’m partially kidding.</p>
<p>OK. I’m not kidding. :)</p>
<p>If Jonri’s arguments are correct, then Interestedad’s are incorrect.</p>
<p>If we don’t know if Jonri’s arguments are correct, then we don’t know if Interestedad’s arguments are correct.</p>
<p>If we don’t know if Interestedad’s arguments are correct, we know he didn’t prove anything.</p>
<p>Since he didn’t prove anything, he didn’t prove that there wasn’t discrimination.</p>
<p>Now for something important.
I can’t believe that Cal’s soccer team lost to Virginia, yesterday. As I said earlier, I saw Cal play a few days ago and they were great. Virginia must be an amazing team. Or maybe Cal just had a bad day? Or the team suffered from jet lag? Or the team had a let down after beating New Mexico?</p>
<p>Yep. Maybe, Virgina sucks. :)</p>
<p>LakeWashington, If you are still there, I would like to apologize for the phrasing I used to respond to your post a couple of pages back. The language I used was crude and uncivil, and leads me to the conclusion that I must start getting more sleep so I am less cranky.</p>
<p>“Xiggi, you’re putting me on, right?
If not, you should have gone to Berkeley instead of Claremont.”</p>
<p>Yeah, well, unfortunately for you, 3 of the 5 Claremont schools kick Cal’s butt when it comes to academic performace, entry-level statistics and grad/phd productivity. I give you a 40% chance to win this argument.</p>