Shelby Steele on Ivy League Admissions

Parents Forum
601

<p>Re Pizzagirl #591, #595, and #599: I posted on the MIT forum over a year ago that I thought they were making a few incorrect decisions <em>within</em> individual demographic groups, that is, <em>within</em> the group of middle-class white males and possibly <em>within</em> the group of middle-class Asian males. </p>

<p>I support affirmative action strongly, and believe that it is necessary at the present time, at most universities. I’ve said so more than once on the MIT forum. </p>

<p>The notion that person X, Y, or Z took the place that should have gone to someone else is not what I am arguing. I would guess that there were roughly 600 people who were admitted at MIT, had more-or-less identical demographic characteristics to the person I have been writing about, and had a less compelling rationale for admission, based specifically on the application packages, in the MIT context–<em>if</em> Marilee Jones had not influenced the decision. Since the student was admitted from the waitlist (after Stu Schmill became Director of Admissions), there is some objective evidence based on what happened at MIT, about the “fit” there. I even suspect that with the benefit of hindsight, at least a person or two in MIT admissions would agree with me–and presumably Stu did even without hindsight.</p>

<p>But I don’t think the issue is exclusively MIT in the Jones era–if it were just that, a few of the posters I have encountered on CC over time would have been admitted a few more places. (I think they are real people–or at least some of them are.) </p>

<p>I do agree with you, Pizzagirl, that many students over-estimate what their chances of acceptance would be, in the absence of preferences for athletes, developmental admits, legacies, and URM’s. </p>

<p>When I looked at it some time ago, the UC system seemed to give students some estimate of the distance between their application files and the level required for acceptance. I think that was a good idea–not sure whether they still do it. Acknowledged, the UC system was a bit reductionist and unidimensional overall, because it was based on point totals (though for many characteristics as well as scores and GPA).</p>

<p>I understand that HYPSM can’t indicate where students rated overall, as a practical matter–but if they could, it would probably help, at least with regard to having the applicants gain some perspective on the URM issue.</p>

602

<p>Hi, Pizzagirl: I hope that my post #601 will not be lost in the interstices of this fast-moving thread.</p>

603

<p>Quant Mech- unless you’ve looked at those 600 or so applications I find your position absurd. I’m sure my kid looked identical to a thousand MIT applicants his year- you can’t possibly know what the teachers say about those kids or what personal or family challenges they may have faced, even if you pick only white kids from Lexington, Brookline, Winnetka, Great Neck, Atherton and Chappaqua. White males, high scores, lots of math/science/research awards. That doesn’t mean that within that pool there aren’t significant differences among those kids. And nobody at MIT has ever claimed that they waitlist kids who aren’t good enough to make the cut-- the waitlist is a yield management tool and there just isn’t room for every single qualified applicant.</p>

604

<p>

</p>

<p>Very nicely put, annasdad.<br>
YK, when we all had toddlers and they fell down and went boom, they looked to mom / dad to see whether they should cry or not. I think there’s an element of that in this process as well. Which is not to say that a student couldn’t be very upset and disappointed - and grieve and cry and all of that – but shouldn’t a parent be modeling more of a cheerful “I understand you’re disappointed, but it’s their loss, and look at all the great things you are going to experience at College Y!” instead of the whiny “it isn’t fair” attitude?</p>

605

<p>“I understand that HYPSM can’t indicate where students rated overall, as a practical matter–but if they could, it would probably help, at least with regard to having the applicants gain some perspective on the URM issue.” </p>

<p>Actually there was a survey done by the College Board and printed in the NYTimes of the relative importance of many factors in admissions decisions, including minority status. Here is a link to the ranking of how much “weight” college admissions offices assigned to those factors:</p>

<p>"On what basis do admissions committees anoint the chosen? The question has preoccupied generations of applicants. “There is no magic formula,” says Gila Reinstein, a Yale spokeswoman. “It’s just not an exact thing.” Nonetheless, the College Board’s annual survey of colleges and universities does ask them to rank admissions criteria. No surprise: high school academic record is consistently rated “very important,” as are standardized test scores (Harvard contends they’re only “important”). But what about all that other stuff? Institutions below admit the country’s best students: 25 percent of their freshman classes, fall 2004, scored 700 or more on the math or verbal SAT and placed in the top 10 percent of their high school graduating classes. But academics alone won’t get you in. Here’s what else matters. "</p>

<p>[The</a> New York Times > Education > Image > Admissions Sine Qua Non](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/01/08/education/edlife/data.1.graphic.html]The”>The New York Times > Education > Image > Admissions Sine Qua Non)</p>

606

<p>Reading the comments about dealing with the joy of the successes and the agony of the rejections made me look in the arcane depth of this forum. Do not be shocked by the format … those were indeed the good old days! I hope the link does not throw a gusher of musty dust into your faces!</p>

<p>Perhaps it was simpler then than today. Sure looks like it:</p>

<p>[Dealing</a> with rejection…](<a href=“http://www.collegeconfidential.com/discus/messages/70/8207.html]Dealing”>http://www.collegeconfidential.com/discus/messages/70/8207.html)</p>

<p>It is strange to see so many names from the present and from the past.</p>

607

<p>To blossom, post #603: True, I haven’t read a lot of college applications–though I have read a fair number applications from students applying for special scholarships. On the other hand, I’ve looked at a very large number of fellowship applications of students who are college seniors when they apply. I appreciate that students grow at uneven rates in college, so that the outcomes don’t exactly match the incoming circumstances. Still, I’ve known a lot of people across many stages of their careers; I have a lot of friends at top places. I’m pretty confident of my assessment. As mentioned earlier, I live in Podunk Heights, but I don’t spend my intellectual life there.</p>

608

<p>

</p>

<p>And a senior in college is a different creature in terms of cognitive development than is a 17 year old.</p>

<p>And expectations for graduate work are not mirrored in admissions criteria for undergrad work.</p>

609

<p>Quite true about admissions for graduate work, epiphany, post #608. But a lot of fellowships are awarded based on more holistic criteria and projections for the future–much like undergrad admissions, except with more information.</p>

610

<p>Thank you for reposting that, because I had missed it and I think it is an absolutely excellent post by pizzagirl. It IS an accomplishment to have worked hard on many fronts and to wind up being a credible candidate for highly selective colleges, music schools, officer training programs or…whatever.</p>

611

<p>Post #601 (new numbers) is the one I didn’t want Pizzagirl to miss, at least as far as the issue of URM admits goes–take or leave the other remarks that blossom called “absurd.”</p>

612

<p>

</p>

<p>That still does not make them (the former) projectible or equivalent models in reverse.</p>

613

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, admissions by the number is probably what affects the majority of students going to selective schools. Most such students go to moderately selective state universities like [San</a> Jose State University](<a href=“http://info.sjsu.edu/web-dbgen/narr/admission/rec-1208.html]San”>http://info.sjsu.edu/web-dbgen/narr/admission/rec-1208.html).</p>

<p>Of course, purely or mostly numbers based admissions can work well in that context, because the usual numbers in the US do show some reasonable differentiation within the applicant pool, and it is a cheap way of dealing with thousands of applicants. Additionally, the state universities may need to show greater transparency for political reasons.</p>

<p>The highly selective schools find a large number of applicants clustered at the top of the scale, with “maximum” academic credentials (the usual academic measures in the US do not really differentiate between these applicants who may outnumber the spaces available in the freshman admission class), so their situation is different. So they have to find other criteria, which people may or may not agree with, to select a freshman class out of a larger number of applicants with “maximum” academic credentials.</p>

614

<p>Which is better - a Ukelele player or a skeet shooter?</p>

615

<p>^ depends on the state and how many prizes they’ve collected.</p>

616

<p>Or whether that particular adcom reading the file that day is more intrigued with ukelele players than with skeet shooters. Which isn’t “unfair,” just because a different adcom might spark more to the skeet shooters. Randomness isn’t inherently unfairness.</p>

617

<p>

I was waiting for the punchline of a good joke.</p>

618

<p>You missed the announcement about Stanford admissions diversity of 2015 pool. I think the announcement said they got the goldmedal skeet shooter or something to that effect and the best tap dancer? They will need the best Ukelele player in 2012 for sure?</p>

619

<p>While it’s no Ivy League application story, when D2 auditioned for one of her school’s many very-talented a cappella groups as a freshman, she showed up with her ukelele (even though, yes, it was an a cappella group) that she self-taught herself to play. The other members were so enamored by her ukelele that she was one of only two freshman who was asked to join her first choice group. Yea, having vocal talent didn’t hurt, either.</p>

<p>She named her ukelele, too!</p>

620

<p>C’mon-- spill. What is the ukelele’s name?</p>