<p>Yolochka, your attempt at a cheap shot sugarcoated by a hollow smiley is none too endearing. </p>
<p>People who have the means, the knowledge, and the wisdom to recognize that specialists can be helpful, do not have to justify their decisions. If a child is sick, few would hesitate to hire the best they can afford. Why would it be any different for a very important step in their life.</p>
<p>We all choose our battles. For some, the journey starts with an academic spoonfeeding at an early age. For others, borrowing the forced learning methods from other cultures is the ticket. And for others, providing the best help entails hiring outsiders. To each his or her own.</p>
<p>Some love to fix their aging cars. Others take their Lexus to the dealer.</p>
<p>I’m not sure it’s necessarily a cheap shot so much as a rhetorical attempt, rightly or wrongly, to point out an example of perceived hypocrisy. </p>
<p>The parallel I think she’s trying to draw is not unlike that of loopy educational activists and politicians attempting to eliminate academically gifted/accelerated programs in public schools because they’re “too elitist” while sending their own kids to academically elite private day/boarding schools. </p>
<p>Moreover, there is a case to be made that non-academic factors within holistic admissions can be taken too far to the point they end up coming at the expense of academic capabilities, campus cultural fabric, etc. </p>
<p>A good example of this are many folks…including famous politicians who were admitted to Ivy colleges before the mid-'60s when being upper/upper-middle class WASP and/or well-connected did count more than one’s academic bona-fides. </p>
<p>Incidentally, current Ivy admission policies place much more weight on academic merit now than they did back then if my Yalie '70 uncle* and Yale’s own alum magazine are to be believed. </p>
<ul>
<li>One major factor in the great social gulf between his/later Yale classes and prior ones like a certain former president was the change in admissions policies to weigh academic merit more heavily and to reduce high SES factors so more middle and working-class students were admitted.</li>
</ul>
<p>Most of us would agree, in theory, that diversity in a college class is desirable and most of us respect the right of institutions to seek diversity in their applicants. The ideal we have in mind when thinking of this, is the opportunity for students to experience a vibrant and exciting intellectual atmosphere created by individuals with varied backgrounds, life experiences, and opinions. Also, perhaps, we want to see a leveling of the playing field so that the student from inner city Detroit who did extremely well within his environment doesn’t get left out in favor of a Boston prep school kid with slightly higher scores and better EC’s but who had every advantage in life.</p>
<p>That said, what people object to is false diversity without substance. The 1/32nd Native American example might be extreme, but what about the 3rd generation URM whose parents are wealthy and send him to Phillips Andover? Sure he’s African American / Hispanic/ Cambodian/ whatever, but was his life experience so different from that of his Caucasian classmates that an admission boost is warranted? Not based on the lack of educational opportunity, certainly. And race in America is very far from clear. Dad is Caucasian, mom is Hispanic. Of what race are the children? What box gets checked on the application? Does it make a difference if the family lives exactly the same way as their neighbors, as in no cultural distinctions, Spanish not spoken at home, etc.? I don’t know the answer to this.</p>
<p>You say that you value diversity, but then you seem to think that African American students, and other students of color, should fit into some narrow category to bring value to the community. Here’s a beautiful video about this kind of thinking:</p>
<p>I will also say that even for the most privileged African American students, racism is a real factor in this country. It impacts their experiences, and people’s expectations of them, and provides challenges that are different from those faced by white students. The knowledge and experience brought by people who have done the best at overcoming these challenges has immense value, and having them as part of a community can provide role models, and networking for all students, but particularly for other students of color.</p>
<p>Just saw her on the Today Show. Delightful kid but even I know 2120 SATs rarely get you into Ivy League colleges. I believe her when she says her piece was a satire/catharsis after having been rejected by her “dream schools.” Sounds like she may be headed to the University of Michigan, which nobody should be ashamed of or disappointed in.</p>
<p>Not me. I think colleges should select the smartest and most high-achieving students they can, and if certain groups are over-represented and other groups under-represented, so be it.</p>
<p>GFG, folks have to accept that adcoms are not puppies jumping at each treat offered. In fact, the Exeter (or name an elite suburb) minority kid absolutely can be viewed in his own context. </p>
<p>Yes, after years on CC, we know racism is still a reality. Smart types couch it in other concerns, but it shows each time the claim is made these kids are lesser. Or the tired argument that “everyone knows” how "those " kids got in.</p>
<p>Nearer to truth is that our own little darlings, whether we drove them or let them find their own way, are too often presenting (vis a vis elite colleges) as great high school students. What’s often missing is the components that predict or suggest that they will be great, engaged elite-college participants. It’s not 13th grade.</p>
<p>Bel, you’re not alone in wishing stats were the be-all. But they aren’t. These schools want sense, curiosity, vision, maturity, perspective- and that their students can climb out of their tidy little interest boxes. Stats show the ability to set a goal (or accept others’ goals) and meet it. They say nothing about the rest of the kid.</p>
<p>What is your definition of racism? If someone asserts that two groups are different on average, based on evidence, is that racism? Racial preferences would not be used to achieve diversity if URMs did not present applications that were lesser in other respects, on average.</p>
<p>My half Hispanic kids don’t see themselves as any different from anyone else in their school because they all grew up in the same town, they and the vast majority of their peers had middle class professional parents, and they went to the same caliber of schools their whole lives. The fact that we had less money than some others due to their father’s slower economic start as an immigrant, or that people occasionally made racist cracks, did not fundamentally change their background or experience. They have a Spanish last name and their skin is a little darker than a typical Caucasian’s (like perhaps an Italian), and that’s about it. IMO, they’d add no more URM diversity to a school than a white kid whose father grew up in Alaska.</p>
<p>As someone who’s biracial and trained as an anthropologist, I always get the heebie geebies at the assertion that there’s “evidence” that “races” are different.</p>
<p>I just saw Suzy Weiss on the Today Show and I found her to be just as annoying in person as she is in print. Yes, I’m not sure her stats would be desirable to most top colleges. A 2120 is not that great. As we’ve all said above these days kids need the whole application to reflect excellence, almost perfection, hard work and dedication. Anything less than that will not cut it. That’s just the way it is.</p>
<p>See, from my perspective, looking at apps, I can argue against the stereotype that urms or low SES kids are subpar. They take AP and DE, play instruments and sports, do research, engage in the community, lead in their schools, even get funding, in many cases, for those hs trips. They get the AP 4/5, meet the SAT bars. They write great essays. And can self-advocate- especially important when mum and pops can’t do that for them.</p>
<p>Racism is assuming they start less and end up less. Racism is assuming they got in based on empathy, misguided goals, etc. That they displaced a “better” kid.</p>
<p>And guess what? The desire to balance classes in many ways will long include balance in backgrounds.</p>
<p>" Racial preferences would not be used to achieve diversity if URMs did not present applications that were lesser in other respects, on average."</p>
<p>For the math-y type you are, I’m surprised you missed another pretty basic interpretation. Yes, it could be if URMs presented “lesser” credentials. Or, it could be that URMs could be presenting equal level credentials, but applying in lower amounts / making up a smaller portion of the applicant pool than their size in society. For example, lets say blacks are 10% of the population but only 5% of the applicant pool. Their credentials could be the same on average, but if a school wanted to achieve 10% blacks they’d have to “over accept” to get there. </p>
<p>Anyway, one thing you have to come to grips with is that here in America, in 2013, our cultural norms are such that we value diversity, we value looking at people in context of their backgrounds, and we value more than just SAT scores. Nothing prevents you and like-minded people from forming the University of The Almighty Scores. But there’s a reason that the elite u’s in this country don’t do that. Have you figured it out?</p>
<p>Beliavsky, let’s say your kid is at an elite school. He is assigned a triple. He walks in. One of his new roommates is Asian and extends his hand. The other new roommate is black and also extends his hand. What assumptions, if any, do you make about the character, intellect and “fitness / deservingness” of each student to be there? What assumptions do you make and what drives them? Your son is now asked to choose one of them to be a study buddy. Which do you want him to choose? Do you have a preference?</p>
<p>At the state level, initiatives to curtail racial preferences have almost always been successful, so the norms of our universities may differ from those of the taxpayer.</p>
<p>Beliavsky, what will it take for you to accept the way things are in this country? Universities and large corporations and small start-ups and government organizations and non-profits value many kinds of intelligence. These include not only math and science proficiency, but also creativity, problem-solving, collaboration, strategic thinking, and communication skills. Our society embraces, seeks out and rewards those who are multi-dimensional and, in many cases, DIFFERENT from everybody else. Your refusal to let go of your firmly held belief in the superiority of Asians, and men, comes across as a giant tantrum. You are not going to get your way, so why not accept it and move on?</p>
<p>I’m not sure statistically URMs are receiving the hook status they once did. I actually suspect it’s more like a tip, these days, not much more than being full pay.</p>
<p>I’d like to see more recent evidence, with the athletes and musicians and other special interest groups removed from the pool.</p>
<p>I think it might be that Joe average URM student who doesn’t bring a special individual talent to the game isn’t really getting more than a tip from this, anymore, and that’s no different from any other group.</p>
<p>Also, Lookingforward, I think your continued emphasis on the lower SES students is a red herring. The number of pell recipients at these schools is not all that large, and I don’t believe that low SES students are being given much preferential treatment at elite universities.</p>
<p>Bel, so what? Life is not always about statistical superiority. The shift in organizational thinking goes back decades. The best guy is not always the fastest. The best and fastest is not always visionary. The best, fastest and visionary isn’t always an effective communicator. So would you simply say, hire the guy with the best stats?</p>
<p>Poetgrl, my ref to SES starts in that others bring it into similar conversations. And can end there. But chat about “under prepared” or underachieving kids often blends into economic status. That’s all.</p>
<p>Fwiw, I don’t think I’m talking about hooks or tips, at all. My point is these kids are fair competitors. Equally worthy.</p>