What should I put for race?

[Claire1016]

<p>How about URMs with below average CC average stats. 1700-1900 SAT, 3.5, lower class rank, and things like that?</p>

[T26E4]

<p>kara: do you have admit rate tables broken down by race? I’m just wondering what the respective admit rates are within the sub categories. Your argument would hold well if admit rates within the sub category is higher than the non-URM catgories.</p>

[floee]

<p>I’m a URM, and apparently it’s like, the gold card. It’s relatively annoying that next year, when I hopefully go to my top choice college, I might be seen as having a “gifted” admission because of my status, even though I’m in the top 50% of the applicant pool.
However, if it gets my grant aid up, then WHOOOOO!
Oh, and Native American = platinum card. But you have to be registered/able to prove it [a direct ancestor on one of the rolls from the 1800’s]</p>

[PBailey]

<p>Of course tokenadult is a lot more experienced than me, but it seems to me that adcoms would guess based on names secretly, because firstly, they might not have known about Norwegian Chinese-sounding names, and secondly because i think they really care about race. i can’t think of another good reason that some colleges request/require a faceshot of applicants…</p>

[MrPrez]

<p>I didn’t read through the thread, but I put Asian-American/Korean on all of my apps.</p>

[hieronymus312]

<p>lol at MrPrez…</p>

[tokenadult]

<p>

it seems to me that adcoms would guess based on names secretly

</p>

<p>There must be a lot who do not, as there are some HUGE numbers of students reported as “race/ethnicity unknown” at several colleges. And guessing by family name would be an especially ill advised procedure. The United States Census has actually studied the issue of how reliably a person’s ethnicity can be guessed by family name, and many family names are claimed by people of quite a few different ethnicities in the multiethnic, “race-mixing” population of the United States. </p>

<p>The majority of college application forms that I have ever checked do not request a photograph of the applicant at the time of application. My own son has been guessed to belong to several different “races” on the basis of his physical appearance, so that is not reliable either.</p>

[nyc]

<p>SAT scores of 1950 and gpa of 3.5 are strong enough to get many number of hooked White kids (boys in particular) into top schools (I didn’t include rank b/c pvt schools and many strong prublics don’t rank). This hooked group included legacies, athletes, development admits, residents from under-represented states (way easier from Montana or even VT/ME than from NY/NJ/CT/MA/CA) - - and the list goes on. </p>

<p>But with URM students representing only about 8% even at Ivies and to LACs - - probably a smaller % than most of the other hooked groups. So why all the concern with race?</p>

<p>I’m not sure there’s any issue of fairness w/ respect to pvt colleges/unis, since no applicant is entitled to a seat there. The admin iat a pvt college/uni s building a community, and ifthe admin thinks a strong theatre prgm is an essential element of that community, actors and set desingers get a boost. If the admiin wants a strong music prgm, the oboe player, bassonist and kid on baritone horn are all in luck. And the world has always been the oyster of the boy (regardless of race) who make the shot from the 3 point line. </p>

<p>Who ever said the kid with the strongest grades/scores gets the gold ring?</p>

[jcy2009]

<p>they’re going to keep the URM prefernce anyways, no use talking about it.</p>

<p>Look at California. They are entirely merit based…a pure meritocracy in college admissions and 50% of most o their schools are Asian. Would HYPS really want that to happen? Don’t think so. I believe Harvard has like a 16% Asian population. Just thinking about it doesn’t make any sense.</p>

[Plainsman]

<p>It’s a myth that America is a pure meritocracy. Read Dan Goldman’s book “The Price of Admission.” Add celebrity status to athletes, legacies, etc. If you’re a male/female teenage actor or singer, you’re gold to the admissions committee. The publicity that celebrity “X” is a student there is highly prized by administrators, because it adds glamour to a school. </p>

<p>If some kid on Nickelodean gets an admissions leg up, why begrudge a Native American kid for using his “platinum card?”</p>

[tokenadult]

<p>MODERATOR’S NOTE TO “How much does being an URM truly help?” THREAD: </p>

<p>I would have thought that readers of College Confidential would check the forum for existing threads on the same subject that have been near the top of the forum on the same day before posting a new thread on the same topic. Anyway, the thread “How much does being an URM truly help?” has now been merged into the existing “‘Race’ in College Admissions FAQ & Discussion Thread 2.” </p>

<p>The short answer to the OP’s question is that colleges don’t publish sufficient information to make sure how much, if any, admissions advantage there is for an underrepresented minority ethnicity student who applies to a particular college. Some independent researchers who have studied previous entering classes at some colleges, sometimes with a promise of confidentiality, have found a substantial advantage for URM applicants. Previous court cases have uncovered practices that are illegal at state universities, such as explicit quotas or rigid point systems favoring all applicants from some ethnic groups. What actually goes on today is unclear, and in one case is still under investigation. </p>

<p>[Department</a> of Education expands inquiry into Jian Li bias case - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2008/09/08/21307/]Department”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2008/09/08/21307/) </p>

<p>My sense of the evidence is given in the first post of this FAQ thread: </p>

<p>

@tokenadult

Recognize that students from a variety of ethnic groups–including whatever group or groups you would identify with, if any–are admitted to each of your favorite colleges each year. On the other hand, admission to some colleges (e.g., Harvard) is just plain competitive, so lots of outstanding students self-identified with each ethnic group you can imagine (or not self-identified with any group) are not admitted each year. Do your best on your application, apply to a safety, and relax.

</p>

<p>P.S. It’s a very good idea to take a look at the Common Data Set reported figures (based on mandatory federal reporting) for various colleges in [post</a> #4](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1061012037-post4.html]post”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1061012037-post4.html) in this FAQ thread to check how many “URM” students are reported by each college. You can use the same online tool to look up any college you want. People frequently guess wrong about how many URM students attend even a college they know well, such as their own alma mater.</p>

[dontno]

<p>

If some kid on Nickelodean gets an admissions leg up, why begrudge a Native American kid for using his “platinum card?”

</p>

<p>I don’t think either should get a leg up, but at least the kid from Nickelodeon is getting a benefit from his TALENT. The Native American is getting by on a genetic quality, not on his own hard work and success.</p>

[mommusic]

<p>Would a school really admit Student A over Student B because A happens to be Native American? </p>

<p>If I were on the admissions committee I would be impressed if a kid from the reservation managed to turn his hardscrabble education into a success story, but less so by the middle-class kid from the suburbs who just happens to have NA ancestry.</p>

<p>Again, any AA should be based on socio-economics, not “race.”</p>

<p>And as far as that kid who has the massive “talent”–there are also cases of gold-medal Olympians who did not get into HYP.</p>

[tokenadult]

<p>

Would a school really admit Student A over Student B because A happens to be Native American?

</p>

<p>That’s what is unclear these days. As this thread (various replies by various participants) illustrates, it is believed that some colleges do that currently. I don’t know of any college that is clear and explicit about what its policies are in this regard. </p>

<p>I agree with the suggestion, made by Laura D’Andrea Tyson in an article in Business Week, and by many other scholars, that socioeconomic status is an important aspect for colleges to consider when deciding the admission of “otherwise equal” applicants. </p>

<p>[BW</a> Online | July 7, 2003 | Needed: Affirmative Action for the Poor](<a href=“Businessweek - Bloomberg”>Businessweek - Bloomberg)</p>

[ramennoodles08]

<p>I agree socioeconomic status should be considered by colleges but the drawback is that some URMs who are not socioeconomically challenged have a LARGE advantage in admissions, for example last year during college admissions a URM applicant that went to the same high school as me(not going to mention specific race but…I’m sure you can infer it was between Hispanic and African American) this person was not struggling socioeconomically at all (parents made at least 120,000 a year) but because of their ethnicity got into the University of Michigan with a 23 ACT, 1550 SAT and a 3.6 GPA(only taking 1 AP class), while I had a 29 ACT, 2050 SAT, and ~3.8 GPA(6 AP Classes) and was waitlisted/rejected both applied early response (I listed ethnicity as Asian by the way probably a questionable decision) </p>

<p>Now I’m not trying to come off as a bitter student or even feel that I deserve to get into UMich because their are plenty of applicants that have far superior stats to me that were also waitlisted/screwed over and rejected last year, but something about that scenario I went through last year seemed blatantly unfair to me. However, I have moved on and I’m working hard at my new school now trying to make the best out of my situation. I will say that something needs to be changed about college admissions because it is truly unfair to future students who work much harder than another student toward a goal only to see their dreams get destroyed by someone who happens to be lucky enough to be born a certain way.</p>

[sybbie719]

<p>In the Amicus Brief submitted by Harvard University, Brown
University, the University Of Chicago, Dartmouth College, Duke University,
The University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, and Yale
University in support of the University of Michigan they state:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/admissions/legal/gra_amicus-ussc/um/Harvard-both.pdf[/url]”>http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/admissions/legal/gra_amicus-ussc/um/Harvard-both.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

The amici and other highly selective educational institutions consider an academically qualified student’s race or ethnicity as one among many factors in a carefully designed, competitive admissions process that views each applicant as an individual and weighs the capacity of each to contribute to the class as a whole.</p>

<p>Academically selective universities have a compelling interest in ensuring that their student bodies incorporate the experiences and talents of the wide spectrum of racial and ethnic groups that make up our society. Amici should be free to compose a class that brings together many different kinds of students; that includes robust representation of students from different races and ethnicities; and that prepares graduates to work successfully in a diverse nation. </p>

<p>Indeed, highly selective universities have long defined as one of their central missions the training of the nation’s business, government, academic, and professional leaders. By creating a broadly diverse class, amici’s admissions policies help to assure that their graduates are well prepared to succeed in an increasingly complex and multi-racial society. The policies also make certain that no racial or ethnic group is excluded from that vital process.</p>

<p>Although petitioners suggest that universities should consider factors like economic circumstances and personal hardships, the truth is that those factors are already taken into account in the typical selective admissions process. Petitioners’ proposals for guaranteed admissions plans for the top GPA achievers among the applicant pool are unworkable for relatively small private universities, which simply cannot promise to admit the top ten percent (or even the top one per cent) of graduating high school seniors. Nor could graduate schools, with fewer available spaces and even more selective criteria, feasibly operate under such formulas.</p>

<p>Even if a policy of guaranteed admission for students graduating in a specified percentile of their high school class succeeded in admitting a certain number of minority students, it would likely compel the admission of so many others, non-minority applicants as to eliminate available spaces in the college class for those with unusual backgrounds, experiences, and other talents to contribute. </p>

<p>**Such alternatives are therefore fundamentally incompatible with the commitment to consider each applicant on his or her individual merit, taking into account all factors, not just test scores or class rank that would militate for or against admission to a selective university. **</p>

<p>Whatever strict scrutiny properly requires, it should not force universities to achieve one vital interest (racial diversity) to the exclusion of another (treatment of students as individuals) and thereby compromise the constitutional imperative of academic freedom.</p>

<p>pages 26- 28 of the pdf document states:</p>

<p>**The purpose of a university admissions process is not simply to identify the students who, if admitted, would be likeliest to earn the highest grade-point averages. **Quite apart from the impossibility of reliably making that prediction, pursuit of so narrow a goal would be unlikely to yield a student body that any sensible university would wish to enroll. </p>

<p>While amici continue to place the highest priority on academic rigor,** they have always sought to enroll a broad cross-section of students who can bring a critical mix of experiences and perspectives into the university community and who can leave it well prepared to serve as future leaders of our society. **</p>

<p>The factors considered in amici’s individualized admissions programs are extraordinarily varied, wide-ranging, and notoriously difficult to quantify. Although petitioners and the United States sometimes give the impression that university admissions officers consider just test scores, class rank, and race, little could be more misleading.</p>

<p>Admission factors begin, of course, with the core academic criteria, including not just grades and test scores but teacher recommendations and state, regional, national, and international awards. In some cases, those criteria will be all but decisive, either positively (very rarely) or negatively (more often). In the vast majority of cases, however, they are not themselves decisive, and the process continues. </p>

<p>Admissions officials give special attention to, among others, applicants from economically and/or culturally disadvantaged backgrounds, those with unusual athletic ability, those with special artistic talents, those who would be the first in their families to attend any college, those whose parents are alumni or alumnae, and those who have overcome various identifiable hardships. The committee also extends favorable consideration to applicants who write exceptionally well, to applicants who show a special dedication to public service, and to those who demonstrate unusual promise in a wide variety of fields. </p>

<p>By the same token, the individualized admissions process means that simply eliminating the consideration of minority race and ethnicity would not significantly increase any given non-minority student’s odds of gaining admission to an academically selective university.</p>

<p>page 29 of the pdf states:</p>

<p>The Interest In Racial Diversity Cannot Be Served By Race-Neutral Reliance On Factors, Such As Economic Disadvantage, That Are Already Carefully Considered.</p>

<p>Petitioners argue that race-conscious admissions decisions are unnecessary because suitable attention to race-neutral factors will do just as well. The United States urges (as one solution) that universities look to such factors as special economic hardship instead of race. See U.S. Grutter Br. 24-25. But the decisive fact is that all of the suggested race-neutral factors, and many more besides, already enter into admissions decisions. Consideration of those factors alone does not achieve the distinctly racial diversity that amici seek in their student bodies. To accomplish that goal, admissions committees must give favorable consideration to minority race in addition to those other factors, not instead of them.</p>

<p>To “tweak” the race-neutral factors emphasized by petitioners – for example, by deliberately tilting individual admissions toward “hardship” students in the hope of thereby selecting a large enough increment of minority students to make up for the losses that would result from race-blind admissions – would be disingenuous at best. Such an approach would in truth be a race based policy and not a race-neutral alternative at all.</p>

<p>A race-neutral preference for economically disadvantaged students, for example, would admit many more whites than non-whites, because of sheer demographic realities.14 And, of course, the university interest in admitting minority students goes well beyond just admitting minority students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

</p>

[tokenadult]

<p>Thanks, sybbie719, for posting excerpts of the friend of the court brief submitted during argument of the last major Supreme Court case related to higher education affirmative action. That illustrates what some colleges were claiming at the time of the litigation of that case about their own practices, and what those colleges think is good national policy. </p>

<p>A lot of scholars disagree with the factual statement in that brief that colleges already pay suitable attention to student economic circumstances and personal hardships. Here are some links about the issue. The overall picture in the past decade has been that high-ability, low-income students are at a clear disadvantage in the college admission process compared to low-ability, high-income students. (The links below are in approximate chronological order of publication, from oldest to newest.) </p>

<p>[BW</a> Online | July 7, 2003 | Needed: Affirmative Action for the Poor](<a href=“Businessweek - Bloomberg”>Businessweek - Bloomberg) </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0621.pdf[/url]”>http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0621.pdf&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ff0615S.pdf[/url]”>Error; </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/carnrose.pdf[/url]”>http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/carnrose.pdf&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/kahlenberg-affaction.pdf[/url]”>http://www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/kahlenberg-affaction.pdf&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p>[A</a> Thumb on the Scale | Harvard Magazine](<a href=“http://harvardmagazine.com/2005/05/a-thumb-on-the-scale.html]A”>http://harvardmagazine.com/2005/05/a-thumb-on-the-scale.html) </p>

<p>[The</a> Best Class Money Can Buy - The Atlantic (November 2005)](<a href=“http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200511/financial-aid-leveraging/4]The”>http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200511/financial-aid-leveraging/4) </p>

<p>[The</a> Harvard Crimson :: News :: Recruiting a New Elite](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=510012]The”>http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=510012) </p>

<p>[Cost</a> Remains a Key Obstacle to College Access](<a href=“http://www.equaleducation.org/commentary.asp?opedid=1240]Cost”>http://www.equaleducation.org/commentary.asp?opedid=1240) </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.jackkentcookefoundation.org/jkcf_web/Documents/_JKC_Achievementrap_edit%20(2)%20for%20website%20-%202-21-08.pdf[/url]”>http://www.jackkentcookefoundation.org/jkcf_web/Documents/_JKC_Achievementrap_edit%20(2)%20for%20website%20-%202-21-08.pdf&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p>[Legacies</a> of Injustice: Alumni preferences threaten educational equity–and no one seems to care. - Reason Magazine](<a href=“http://www.reason.com/news/show/123910.html]Legacies”>Legacies of Injustice) </p>

<p>[Promise</a> Lost: College-Qualified Students Who Don?t Enroll in College (IHEP)](<a href=“http://www.ihep.org/publications/publications-detail.cfm?id=117]Promise”>http://www.ihep.org/publications/publications-detail.cfm?id=117)</p>

[jlandsoxfan]

<p>I am 25% Asian and 75% Caucasian. I know that Asians are over-represented minorities. On my Common Application, should I only put that I am white? (I just don’t know what constitutes being “Asian,” I mean ppl always call me the Asian kid in the place that I live, however, I know that if I lived in CA or something, nobody would even notice that I am Asian) As far as “self-identifying,” I don’t really think about race that much, I’m an American. Would it be best for me to just say I am white?</p>

[DwightEisenhower]

<p>Put what you would say if someone random on the street asked you how you identify yourself. An honest answer is usually better than the “smart” answer in these type of situations.</p>

[tokenadult]

<p>

As far as “self-identifying,” I don’t really think about race that much, I’m an American.

</p>

<p>You could decline to self-identify with any ethnic group at all, which is a legally permitted choice for any college applicant.</p>