<p>GPA: 4.00/uw, 4.4/w
SAT II: US 730, Bio 690, Chem 750
SAT I: 2070
Rank: top 5%, out of 550
Race/gender: female, AfricanAmerican
AP Courses taken: US, Bio, Chem, English, German AP Courses next year: Gov/Econ, German, Physics, English, Calculus
APBio 5, going to take AP US, Chem, English this year, next is Physics and German
EC:
NHS, SNHS, NTHS
Red Cross Youth Council (VP)
HOSA (Treasurer)
Mu Alpha theta (math)
German Club and Honor Society
Shakespeare club
Track (9,10th grade)</p>
<p>Award/opportunities:
Science Olympiad medalist, (1st)
HOSA medalist, (1st)
Governor?s School for Engineering
Lab research project at a university(1 semester)
Hospital internship (1 semester)
Volunteering:
Several Red Cross projects
Library volunteer</p>
<p>Why are you counting on AA to get you in? Do you see yourself not qualified to get in without AA? How will you feel at Columbia knowing that you got in because you are black? </p>
<p>If you are from a low income family, then you deserve to get a break. </p>
<p>If you are middle class or upper, then I think you should work more on you SAT1. Your schedule is very impressive. I think you can improve your SAT1.</p>
<p>I’m not sure how this comment is relevant. I’m staunchly against AA, but AA is a reality and the fact that she is a black female applying to engineering is a very important piece of her application. I’m not sure how she’s “counting on AA” to get her in, when she just listed all the relevant information and asked for an honest assessment. Besides, she’d probably have a shot at getting in even if she weren’t an AA candidate.</p>
<p>tega:
just so you’ll understand what I meant: african americans have been under oppression in this nation for 245yrs, discrimination especially at educational institutions still exist. AA gives incentive for these institutions to change their ways. I am hoping i wont be discriminated against because of my race, just like my parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc. were. I believe my stats a appreciatable, yet I’m wondering how i compare in the eyes of admission people if I am african american, i just want to know reality</p>
<p>If you are concerned with the cold, hard facts, the sad truth is that there will inevitably be discrimination involved when they read your application.</p>
<p>Race and gender are important to Columbia and AA gives no incentive to make these irrelevant aspects less of an issue; it is making them more of an issue in many ways. So I wouldn’t expect them to be looking much at your accomplishments, or essay, or personality–you’ll be viewed as a politically valuable statistic and judged with that at the top of their minds.</p>
<p>(Another odd truth is that you benefit significantly from that long history of opression in the U.S, so I wouldn’t be defensive or saddened by that history. Without slavery many people today would be much worse off because they would be living in a war-torn, impoverished, often overlooked continent many people, myself especially, would do anything to help. The people of the past made great sacrifices so you could be where you are today, not so you could worry about being a victim as they were.)</p>
<p>I just think the past is the past and lets just focus on the future and working together. The people who suffered as slaves were incredible people; I would have died before I was 10 lossing my family, working under terrible conditions, putting up with abuse. And yet they managed.</p>
<p>But the focus here is her chances for Columbia and political realities of 2006, not 245 years of opression is what I meant.</p>
<p>it’s an intriguing point of view, steve, but somewhat irrelevant to this thread - whether or not people should feel entitled to AA or humiliated by it, or somewhere in between, it’s something of a reality.</p>
<p>however, i don’t think it’s as much of a boost as people would tend to think. Her profile is diverse and heavily committed - she may have gotten even even if she were a rich white dude.</p>
<p>hah, did you just imply that i BENEFIT from the past oppression of my people, of their suppression, subjugation, murders, lynchings, rapes. etc. I think i have the right to be upset about this treatment of my people, this treatment, in which led Africans in a backward state educationally, economically, and politically. trust me, if there was no slavery, i and other africans (or you could say african americans) would be benefitting much more. Today, over half of African Americans live in ghettos.Mmmm… i wonder how they would live if there wasnt slavery…</p>
<p>i will understand if you dont agree with me still steve, but you need to know one thing: claiming the “past is past” and “lets focus on the future” will not bring positive results. why? because the past’s effects are still existing today. that’s right. the effects of slavery are obvious today, (econ, soc. pol.) so think about it steve, before you suggest i should be happy about slavery</p>
<p>My point was that people that are suffering today deserve better regardless of why they are suffering or what happened in the past. And the people suffering the most today are in Africa and other low-income areas (which includes roughly 0% of the US). I doubt anyone here or anyone applying to an Ivy League school would rather be in Nthadire, Malawi without food or water and with a 20% risk of getting malaria and dying before the age of 5. Yet that is where many people are today, 1.2 billion people in similar situation (extreme poverty).</p>
<p>Now we could say that people on the west coast of Africa should suffer since it was African tribes who originally enslaved most of the slaves purchased by Americans, or we could say the past is the past and no one alive today had anything to do with slavery. We could apply the same logic and complain about the past here in the U.S. and punish people who weren’t alive back then, or look forward to the future and help those in need.</p>
<p>For example, we could help the people in living in ghettos who are at risk of violence or need help with addiction or want better schools and better libraries. Or we could focus on the past and punish people who did nothing wrong (but happen to look somewhat like people who did) and run special programs like AA to help a small number of people and effectivly ignore those dying of malaria, and AIDS, and from addiction to drugs (addiction they really aren’t responsible for because of a bad enviornment).</p>
<p>Thats what I mean by shifting the focus. Shift the focus to true victims in the political realm and shift the focus to education in the university realm. This is about education so we shouldn’t talk about 200 years ago (and if we do I think we should be accurate about it–Africans were part of the slave trade and the descendents of slaves are better off in the US than in Africa in almost all cases).</p>
<p>steve:
lets get to the root of this issue. but first, lets clear up a misunderstanding.
African chieftains did involve in some enslavement, yet logically the most involved were European Americans seeking profit through their systems: capitalism,colonialism,imperialism,etc. (read books and you’ll understand more)
The state of african nations today is the effect of european colonialism/imperialism. So was the institutionalization of slavery. They both, being slavery into the americas and the backward current state of africa, stem from the same evil: european capitalism. therefore, you cannot compare the two and call one a lesser evil. Why? because an evil, a wronghappenging, should not be defined as “better” since it is the lesser of the two.</p>