Rejected applicant alleges bias against Asians

Parent Cafe
101

<p>I understand the study - I’ve actually read it, believe it or not. There is a single so-called “academic” variable - SAT scores. The problem is that not even the CollegeBoard claims that SAT scores measure “academic merit”. Their only claim is that it predicts first-year college performance. Only thing is the University of California took five years of data in a very large database and found that, for African-Americans and Hispanics, it isn’t true - they routinely and broadly outperformed expectations. This is why the CollegeBoard was threatened with losing its largest customer (and is the sole reason why the test has been revised.)</p>

<p>In other words, the Princeton study does not measure what it purports to measure - “merit” - in a word, it’s specious. And, yes, I think that, given the caveats I already cited, I think the data will indicate that Asian-American applicants are at an ADVANTAGE when applying to Princeton (Princeton, after all, is not all that different from Williams.)</p>

102

<br>

<br>

<p>It’s discrimination to favor the applicants with high SAT scores. The question is whether this is INVIDIOUS discrimination – that is, an unfair or bigoted attempt to hold people back because of their race.</p>

<p>Right now, the law holds that distinguishing among people based in part on their race is not automatically equivalent to invidious discrimination (which is usually illegal). IMHO, the law gets that right. We do not live in a race-blind world, and a school taking that reality into account is not, per se, doing anything wrong.</p>

103

<p>The Princeton newspaper has published an article, sval,

</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/11/13/news/16544.shtml[/url]”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/11/13/news/16544.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Mr Li is Chinese. The Chinese education system is strictly based on merit. This case goes to the heart of merit vs merit +ECs. Personally, I vote for the merit plus system. I do not like Chinese system and do not think the American system would benefit by shifting toward a strict merit system.</p>

104

<p>How is a three-hour test a measure of “merit”? I can understand hours volunteering in a hospital, or supporting one’s family, or even playing lacrosse ;), but taking a test that’s supposed to predict first-year college performance? Has anyone actually looked at the number of questions right/wrong that determine the difference between a 1500 and a 1600? Would anyone seriously like to argue that this difference is a measure of merit, especially when one can take the test multiple times?</p>

105

<p>I think these arguments mostly come about because of a lack of understanding of why AA exists in the first place.</p>

106

<p>

</p>

<p>The poor thing. Clueless. Princeton waitlisted 1207 applicants last year. They ultimately accepted 0 of those. On the cusp, my big fat white butt.</p>

<p>If he was flat out rejected at Harvard, MIT, Stanford, and UPENN, without so much as a courtesy waitlist, despite having a 1600 SAT and top 1% class rank, Mr. Li had a serious weakness somewhere in his application. 1600 SATs and top 1% will generally get you a courtesy waitlist (similar to a courtesy flush), even at Harvard, MIT, and Stanford. A flat-out rejection with those stats is a message.</p>

<p>BTW, I couldn’t find the data going back as far as I have it at some other schools for my spreadsheet, but Princeton has increased its Asian American enrollment from 7% in 1986 to 13% in 2004. I would love to hear the oral arguments about discrimination in light of those statistics.</p>

107

<p>UUMM Mr Li wasn’t educated in a Chinese education system - he was educated in the American system - which makes no argument for this situation.</p>

<p>It bothers me that he ran around all summer collecting GPA’s and SAT scores - and also that others were willing to provide that info - well except for the gal quoted in the article above. The school he is ‘complaining’ about certainly looks alot further than SAT/GPA’s in their admission process - sorry but I still feel he had an ‘entitlement’ attitude towards his denial to attend.</p>

<p>Interesting comments from other students tho.</p>

108

<p>“BTW, I couldn’t find the data going back as far as I have it at some other schools for my spreadsheet, but Princeton has increased its Asian American enrollment from 7% in 1986 to 13% in 2004.”</p>

<p>And if you assume, just for the sake of argument, that few or none of these fit those other slots (developmental admits, legacies, recruited athletes, published novelists, patent holders, offspring of Senators), it might actually be double that in the “regular admits”.</p>

109

<p>Marite: you have an excellent ratio of valid points to characters typed
Mini: I’m with you on SAT =/= “merit”, and I’m not arguing against affirmative action. But does the UC data show the SAT to vastly overpredict academic ability for Asians relative to whites? Because I think that’s would it would take to get to the result you’re claiming. Also, since you read the Espenshade paper, did he not control for athlete and legacy status? Cause I was pretty sure he did.
Hanna: I can see how the “not invidious” argument can be used to justify preferences for disadvantaged minority groups, which I have no quarrels with anyway. But how would it justify rejecting Asian kids in favor of white ones?</p>

110

<p>I am troubled by the idea taken to its extreme, however, of elite colleges winding up with a bunch of dumb rich white kid athletes whose Daddy or Mommy attended Alma Mater U there to party and a bunch of smart hard-working Asian kids there for the academics and future career success. </p>

<p>Discrimination aside, there is a hint there for a possible future awaiting our kids. Not a certain future, just one of those things the Tarot cards might say is a possible outcome. Or, it could just be a set of sterotypes waiting for new data to demolish them.</p>

<p><em>she posts from Shanghai shaking her head</em></p>

111

<p>There is a constitutional distinction between state and private schools: “state action.” And decrying state action that is race-conscious is why a lot of members of minority groups, and at least some in the majority, oppose affirmative action as it was practiced by many state universities a decade ago.</p>

112

<p>I have no problem with few rich kids whose parents went there. After all their donations make these places affordable and possible for many kids (BTW, I am not rich and pay full freight).</p>

113

<p>

</p>

<p>I think there is a bit of that going on at some schools. Purely a hunch, but the admissions profiles at some schools suggest that Asian Americans are being enrolled to boost the median SATs and fill the desired “academic nerd” quota. This is why there seems to be a factionalization of the student body at some schools. </p>

<p>I don’t think this applies to the Ivy League schools that are getting great students of every imaginable type. I’m thinking more of schools that have seen a rapid rise in median SATs.</p>

<p>Not being Asian American, I don’t have a dog in this hunt. But, if I were Asian American, I would be paying a lot of attention to the role Asian American students play, and have historically played, in the campus community. I suspect there is more perceived alienation at some schools than others.</p>

114

<p>Alumother. How is life at Shanghai? Just a thought on what you posted. Some years ago, your statement could be just as relevant by substituting the word “Asian” with “Jewish” kids. We no longer keep track of “Jewish” applicants. Hopefully, that will be true in time for Asian Americans as well. </p>

<p>Why is it that Asian Americans are perceived as “less American” by here. A large percentage of Asian American college kids are third or fourth generation Americans. In that hey are no different than kids from Irish, Italian, Polish immigrant families. That we are lumping all Asian Americans as one group that cannot represent diversity is what disturbs me.</p>

115

<p>padad - Life in Shanghai is OK thanks. This year I have only been over 4 times. Last year it was more like 7. When I tell you that our offices are in Pudong, you will know that it’s sort of like thinking you are coming to San Francisco and actually you wind up in Fremont:). Life in Shanghai deserves its own thread…</p>

<p>As for the rest of your post - you have put a lot in there together. Li himself is putting all Asians together in his legal action. So for this case, the category is already defined.</p>

<p>Whether Asian Americans are ever as fully assimilated as the European Jews have been, well that’s anyone’s guess, isn’t it. When we say someone is “less American”, by default we must have a definition of “American” in our minds. And whether 4th generation Asian American kids now match or do not match for the most part the cultural majority’s definition of “American”, again, I would be afraid to put out an opinion.</p>

<p>Heck, as a Democratic female who doesn’t believe in God, I probably don’t fit the cultural majority’s definition of “American”. I just have an external guise that allows me to stay incognito…</p>

116

<p>This is the study cited:</p>

<p>The Opportunity Cost of Admission
Preferences at Elite Universities</p>

<p>Thomas J. Espenshade, Princeton University
Chang Y. Chung, Princeton University</p>

<p><a href=“http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/Tje/EspenshadeSSQPtII.pdf[/url]”>http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/Tje/EspenshadeSSQPtII.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

117

<p>" I do not like Chinese system and do not think the American system would benefit by shifting toward a strict merit system."</p>

<p>It would be good if all of us stopped falling into the trap of deeming only the test-based systems as being merit based. It’s a fallacy to call the Chinese system that’s based strictly on test scores the only “merit” system.</p>

<p>“Merit” is what an institution or society determines merit to be. A student who meets the Chinese definition of “merit” because of having only sky high scores would not meet the definition of merit at top American schools, which also look for leadership, community service, athletic demonstrated ability to overcome challenges, and various diversity factors as meaning that an applicant has merit.</p>

<p>These characteristics reflect things that are important in American society, which values leadership, creativity, teamwork, and other things extremely important in the job market and in other systems such as politics.</p>

118

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s a very good question. Another good question would be why the current categories asked for on ethnic identification forms are not the same as the categories that have mattered most historically in American society, nor are they the same as in other countries with immigrant populations similar to those of the United States. The many students (a growing number, I think) who simply don’t fill out anything on the ethnic identification forms are doing their part to assert that we are all human beings here, with more in common than what divides us (or doesn’t) by ethnicity.</p>

119

<p>“Couldn’t all of the conjecture and contention have been avoided if the applicants’ race wasn’t requested and noted on the application in the first place?”
No. The guy’s name is Jian Li. Most other Asians have names that are similarly obvious giveaways.</p>

120

<p>My d. got an 800 Verbal at age 13 (would have been 8th grade), one of 7 in the country, and her math wasn’t far behind. Merit? She did nothing but take a three -hour test. There wasn’t any “merit” involved in it at all. She did nothing to “deserve” it. She didn’t “earn” it. She didn’t “study” for it. It wasn’t the culmination of 12 years of hard work. She hadn’t cured cancer, written a novel, patented an alternative to fossil fuels.</p>

<p>So, yes. She’s naturally smart. Big deal. Any college admissions officer that would have accepted her on the basis of her score would need his head examined.</p>