<p>
</p>
<p>Well, actually…</p>
<p>Ok i went to a Brown University tour like a week ago and this is what the admissions councelor said:</p>
<p>I quote: “Our admissions office has for the most part discarded the actual use of the SAT. It’s become a formality as of recent years. There have been many studies out recently that indicate it relies too heavily on socioeconomic background to really trust it…”</p>
<p>And this is from the very mouth of an ivy league admissions officer.</p>
<p>argumentum ad verecundiam, my friend, argumentum ad verecundiam.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Surely diversity of thought is more important than diversity of skin pigmentation. I guess merit also compromised by racial diversity sometimes. This is not to say that 1900 is not impressive (like yous said, it’s higher than the average by a lot). However, let’s remember we’re talking about applying to elite schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>By your logic an African American’s 1270 (in the 1600 scale) is equivalent to an Asian American’s 1550? In other words, your comment that URMs don’t have significantly lower test scores is rephrased into “Though URMs may have significant lower test scores, they are not low when compared to the average URM scores.”</p>
<p>Separate but equal categories? The last time they did this was to Jewish applicants to impede their representation. Caucasians to Caucasians, Jews to Jews. Apples to Apples, right?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While colleges are there for their own interests, they also receive federal funding. If racial discrimination is detected, even covertly in the form of racial AA, federal funding may be suspended. </p>
<p>In order to artificially maintain this racial diversity that you support, many more qualified applicants, who are usually Asian, must be rejected. </p>
<p>The Duke study also reveals that Asian and Caucasian admits have better subjective stats than their URM peers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fallacious argument, yes. On the other hand, if adcoms believe it to be true, then the net effect is the same as if it were really true.</p>
<p>adcoms also have something to gain by saying the SAT doesn’t matter. if they say “unhooked kids should really shoot for a 2200 or a 34” then they’re gonna lose a **** load of applications from unhooked kids who can’t hit those scores. by saying the SAT is a formality, brown gets more apps and can brag about its 10% acceptance rate.</p>
<p>wow entertainer, i would recommend that you stop repeating your arguments over and over. in most other countries you are PLACED into colleges by the government based on your… here it comes… STATS! that’s right good old hard numbers. just take a look at france and england, none of their colleges look at ec’s, legacy, race, etc… that is meritocracy at its finest. i think diversity is good, but not based on skin color. diversity of thought and culture may add to the learning experience, but i know black kids that are as white as can be, and white kids who wish they were asian, so the only diversity you achieve is that of physical traits which adds nothing to the learning experience. and entertainer, you keep trying to use the excuse that i don’t know everyone’s situation, or have the stats to back up my argument. well it’s completely unreasonable to expect me to know every urm in the country who drops out of school. however, as you said, half of the African Americans drop out each year, but among asians and whites far fewer drop out. so we can therefore assume that they couldn’t handle the work. you honestly think that there are special, or extenuating circumstances for 50% of them in the country? if anything your assumption is the unreasonable one. and as for being “20 points below the middle 50%” that means he’s 20 points below the 25th percentile, that’s the very bottom of the class, and full of hooked kids. they are the bottom 25% because they wouldn’t have gotten in without their sports boost or urm boost, they are at the bottom because they got boosted in where otherwise they would not have been qualified. the more intelligent students should have access to the better schools because they will go on to do better things regardless of a hardship someone overcame, or the color of their skin. and if the brown admissions counselorsaid they do’t sue the sat then do you really think you can get a 1500/2400 and get in even if you had a perfect gpa? the answer is no. and you keep citing that they don’t have a specific sat or gpa cutoff, but everyone knows a low sat and low gpa= no acceptance letters, don’t be naive. you just keep using the notion that we don’t know their specific scenarios or other admissions factors, but that does of affect their levels of intelligence.</p>
<p>Reapeating his arguments isn’t a problem, arguing against what he’s arguing for is.</p>
<p>All his statements weaken his arguments instead of help them.</p>
<p>Anyway…</p>
<p>trying to get back on topic here, </p>
<p>I dunno… false legacies? (cousins, uncles, siblings, etc)</p>
<p>Compare the endowment of Oxford and Cambridge with those of the ivy league and other similar schools.
There’s really no big difference, especially considering the fact that those schools give no financial aid.</p>
<p>your point? :O</p>
<p>if you wanna talk about oxford or cambridge you should know that gov. doesn’t place kids in those two because they are too elite. the standardized tests administered over the populace aren’t hard enough to distinguish the truly elite. they administer their own, more difficult tests, to students to help them judge a prospective students level of intelligence. this brigs us back to the importance of standardized in admissions.
username: though we are usually on the same page i have to disagree with you on false legacies. some schools ask for any relation to their school such as grandparent, parent, sibling, and i think i’ve even seen step parent before, although cousin is not one i’ve seen.</p>
<p>My comment about comparing SAT’s was something I found interesting. It wasn’t apart of any argument. It was just an opinion that I felt like posting. </p>
<p>I don’t understand why you are repeating my arguments Maho or w/e or trying to argue against me. I didn’t read most of what you wrote, but something did strike me about your post.</p>
<p>“diversity is good, but not based on skin color. Diversity of thought and culture may add to the learning experience, but i know black kids that are as white as can be, and white kids who wish they were asian, so the only diversity you achieve is that of physical traits which adds nothing to the learning experience.”</p>
<p>I think you need to understand what diversity means. Who cares if a black kids act white or vice versa. That has nothing to do with diversity. Every house hold has different values, beliefs, etc. Culture is different in every house hold. Culture is something that you live with that affects your thoughts, actions and perceptions. I don’t know what you consider acting “white.” I honestly take that statement to be offensive and racist in some regards. </p>
<p>This is diversity in my opinion: I’m African. There are some things my family does that others don’t do. I’ve lived in Africa for five years. I’m a U.S citizen attending university this fall. I have gone through experiences, witnessed many cultures, and had many friendships with different people of different tribes, etc. The experiences I’ve had probably have affected how I think in some ways. When I’m in a lecture hall I will use the experiences I have gone through to make useful, insightful contributions in class. No one has gone through the same experiences as I have. No one has witnessed what I’ve seen. That is the essence of having diversity in a university setting. People of different cultures, colors, and creeds can learn from one another. </p>
<p>Racial Diversity and Cultural Diversity are very similar. There are a few differences, but two stand out. People of different races have different culture. People of the same race can have different cultures. I think both are equally effective in a college setting. Once again, just my opinion. I don’t want to be bashed for making statements like this.</p>
<p>Diversity is great to have in a university setting because different ideas from different perspectives can be shared. Whether its cultural, racial, etc. Students can learn something they never knew.</p>
<p>“you keep citing that they don’t have a specific sat or gpa cutoff, but everyone knows a low sat and low gpa= no acceptance letters, don’t be naive.”</p>
<p>Maho, can you read my posts before ranting? I made the comment about the GPA/Cut-off thing. But if you read a little further on(The next line), I also said I think its a load of garbage.</p>
<p>“however, as you said, half of the African Americans drop out each year, but among asians and whites far fewer drop out. so we can therefore assume that they couldn’t handle the work. you honestly think that there are special, or extenuating circumstances for 50% of them in the country? if anything your assumption is the unreasonable one. and as for being “20 points below the middle 50%” that means he’s 20 points below the 25th percentile, that’s the very bottom of the class, and full of hooked kids. they are the bottom 25% because they wouldn’t have gotten in without their sports boost or urm boost, they are at the bottom because they got boosted in where otherwise they would not have been qualified.”</p>
<p>Honestly you can use your valid assumption that they couldn’t handle the work, but until you show me a survey or statistic that fully portrays why they dropped out, I’m sticking to my assumption. If you are 20 points below the 50th percentile, How are you 20 points below the 25th percentile? Obviously you don’t know what you are talking about. If a person is 20 points below the 50th percentile, then they fall into the 25th percentile category( Colleges only post 25/50/75 percentiles ranges).</p>
<p>“and if the brown admissions counselorsaid they do’t sue the sat then do you really think you can get a 1500/2400 and get in even if you had a perfect gpa? the answer is no.”</p>
<p>I know two people that got into Cornell. One had a 4.0 and a 1300/2400. She was valedictorian of her class. That person was African American. I know another student from my graduating class this year that got into Cornell. She had a 4.3 W GPA About 3.8 UW. and a 1700 SAT. Also African American. I think I answered your question. Even though Cornell isn’t as selective in terms of acceptance rate as Brown, they are pretty close. 14%/21%.</p>
<p>By the way this is interesting: </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/african-american-students/638464-actual-results-thread-african-americans.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/african-american-students/638464-actual-results-thread-african-americans.html</a></p>
<p>I’m honestly not arguing anymore because I know that I had weak arguments that weren’t presented properly. One of the main reasons I post on this site is to get better at this sort of thing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yet again you prove that URMs do get preferential treatment.</p>
<p>if diversity is so good, why don’t we bring in some highschool dropouts to harvard? I’m sure that would be quite unique… oh, and that serial killer, and the rapist. Don’t forget the thief! We need diversity!</p>
<p>That comment can be misconstrued as offensive, username.</p>
<p>You’re putting URMs on the same level as those people? Honestly, get off this thread if you’re comparing hard working students who happen to get slight preferential treatment to murderers and thieves.</p>
<p>To be honest, I’m not completely against AA. I mean I am, but since there’s no point being angry about it as it won’t change anything, I’m not.</p>
<p>However, I’m just pointing out how it doesn’t make sense.</p>
<p>I’m not saying URMs are murderers or thieves… I’m saying diversity isn’t necessarily a good thing. The only excuse you have for URMs getting a perferential treatment (AA) is because it brings diversity </p>
<p>(the other one is saying most URMs are poor, but then economic AA would make a lot more sense)</p>
<p>So please explain, what’s so good about diversity in skin color?</p>
<p>Oh, also, in this day and age, anything can be understood as offensive… which is why I hate all this politically correctedness fuzzy wuzzy and refuse to comply to it.</p>
<p>I live in an environment where I’m one of the only Hispanic people at my school; the African American population is virtually nonexistent.
Do I want to continue this? This place is not the real world. Whites and Asians dominate where I live.
I want an environment where there are people of different backgrounds so that I, while balancing a college education, can learn about their cultures and lifestyles. I want to assimilate to an environment in which I, along with my peers, can indulge in the diversity of our species, knowing that we–while very similar–are all different.</p>
<p>I DON’T want a college environment in which virtually everyone comes from the same culture, with people who solely use their spare time to study. </p>
<p>Both the colleges and the students benefit. Happy students = happy alumni and happy alumni = donations</p>
<p>let me ask you this:</p>
<p>who do you think would have a more “unique” or “diverse” background (in the US):
- a white kid who was born in, and lived in africa all his life</p>
<p>or</p>
<ol>
<li>a black kid who has been in the US for generations, and has lived in an affluent white neighborhood all his life?</li>
</ol>
<p>skin color doesn’t matter, and seriously, if you would rather have black/brownish skin over white/yellow, doesn’t that make you a racist?</p>
<p>also, couldn’t this be seen as an offensive sterotype?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well you have your own views on diversity and I have mine. We don’t agree.</p>
<p>By the way visit the actual results thread for African Americans. See if there is any evidence of preferential treatment.</p>
<p>I don’t understand how this is preferential treatment. If an African American female, is valedictorian of her high crime rate, impoverished city. She is also an immigrant from Africa that is seeking an education. She and her mother work to afford their bills. How is that preferential treatment? Through all the adversity she was still able to be Valedictorian. She isn’t given an advantage solely because of race. That is what affirmative action/preferential treatment is.</p>
<p>Maybe I didn’t give enough information about the two people I identified. The latter student is a very good athlete. Varsity track for 4 years. She was recruited by Cornell. She was able to maintain outstanding grades. Even though she got below average test scores, she still deserved to be accepted. At least in my opinion.</p>
<p>well, I know I can’t convince you otherwise, but with all evidence and logic,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>do you see how that statement you made was incorrect?</p>
<p>Yes, I see how my argument is incorrect. Can anyone verify this statement(I sort of paraphrased it):</p>
<p>Apparently I was reading an article about affirmative action. Supposedly, they banned it, but in the legislation, they say that no minority is allowed “extra points” in the admissions process, but race can be used as a factor. Doesn’t that seem contradictory to what is actually happening? </p>
<p>This is the kind of affirmative action I support:</p>
<p>“Some opponents of affirmation action believe the practice implies the preferential selection of unqualified candidates over qualified candidates. But in fact, most supporters of affirmative action oppose such preferential selection and instead prefer preferential selection among equal or comparable candidates.”</p>
<p>I was also reading an article and I found it quite upsetting in some regards. Before Affirmative action was outlawed in California, The UC schools had high representation of blacks. 10.3% of blacks made up the student body at UCLA law school. When Affirmative action was banned blacks made up 1.4%. I find that kind of disturbing. Anyone have any thoughts on this?</p>
<p>If this is the case I strongly believe that race should be used as an admissions factor.</p>