<p>Oops- I didn’t mean to refer to @John Smith, I meant my response for @JMilton.</p>
<p>@JMilton,
For the record, I just spoke to my daughter who had to make a pact with an equally situated minority girl to go out of their way to “show” to the European host towns and families that they weren’t like the negative stereotypes people have of them. So on top of the crushing academic loads, and the difficulties of living in a town where few speak English, they have to carry that burden too. You can’t walk into a store and pretend to be anything but “black.” And you can’t help but notice the relief some families have for not having been given “one.” (luckily her host family is a gem).</p>
<p>Can you imagine being a kid and having to walk on eggshells like that all the time? No other student in their program has to worry about carrying that weight on their shoulders. </p>
<p>You can’t possibly know what kids like that (or even their families) have to put up with. That Utopian, race-blind, society you live in isn’t true for a lot of other people - regardless of economic status.</p>
<p>You’re right - this assumption that a rich black kid took a spot from a poor white one is ludicrous since those rich (and middle class) black kids are paying tuition and the majority of financial aid goes to white students.</p>
<p>Funny how these naysayers never question that a rich white legacy with lower scores but a building with their name on it might be the cause of the “one less spot.” :)</p>
<p>Please help me understand your argument better.</p>
<p>Are you contending that the economic disadvantages of non-URM applicants should not be an admission factor because prep schools are “privately funded foundation[s]” that have “no obligation to do anything but be self sustaining”? </p>
<p>If so, can’t we apply the principle of reductio ad absurdum to extend your premise to conclude that privately funded boarding schools should abolish financial aid and affirmative action? </p>
<p>Or does your tough luck theory of economic sustainability exempt these highly unprofitable practices and apply only to granting an admission hook to poor and lower middle class Asian and white applicants? </p>
<p>In an apparent reference to poverty, you also assert, “There is simply not enough spots at all the boarding schools combined to take care of … [this] … global problem.” Is it your position, then, that we should not address a problem unless we can eliminate it? </p>
<p>If so, would you abolish affirmative action because there are not enough prep school admission slots to end the world-wide phenomenon of racism? Would you dismantle all anti-poverty programs because the government lacks the resources to end poverty? </p>
<p>Or would you support programs that ameliorate poverty even if they can’t eliminate it? If so, shouldn’t you also champion a modest approach that grants an admission hook to economically disadvantaged non-URM applicants?</p>
<p>The percentage of full pay students and students of color at Andover and Exeter is roughly the same. </p>
<p>The fact that any prep school has more students than another prep school does not change the percentage of full pay students at each school. Thus, School A will have 65% of full pay students and School B will have 54% of full pay students regardless of the fact that School A has fewer students than School B. </p>
<p>As those full pay students appear to be from families with annual incomes in the top 2.5% or so of all families in America, a disproportionate number of wealthy students attend both School A and School B regardless of the relative number of students at each school. </p>
<p>From what I can gather, this principle applies to all top prep schools. It is less pronounced at a school where 55% of the students attend on a full pay basis than one where 71% of the students attend on a full pay basis. Nevertheless, wealthy kids are still disproportionately represented at both schools.</p>
<p>jmilton, The OP is asking if ABC is racist? What is your position? </p>
<p>If you say you don’t care about ABC, then you are posting in the wrong thread. Btw, I find your long winding posts not addressing the OP’s question directly in a concise way rather than making some philosophical arguments. I don’t think OP got an answer from you to her question.</p>
<p>If defending the rights of the less fortunate were a crime, I would happily plead guilty to that imaginary offense. </p>
<p>My first post was a defense of the OP and other similarly situated applicants. My subsequent posts responded to posts addressed to me - ones that often showed what I regard as a troubling insensitivity to the plight of many poor and lower middle class children in our country. </p>
<p>Again, ABC is not my concern. If it is a a not-for-profit, private foundation that operates without government funding, it should be able to support poor, minority applicants. In fact, I applaud it for doing so because economically disadvantaged applicants are desperately in need of help. </p>
<p>I do, however, find the lack of intellectual consistency on this issue remarkable. Thus, I am stunned that the same people who support the efforts of ABC denigrate or ignore the necessity of giving an admission hook to economically disadvantaged Asian or white applicants.</p>
<p>jmilton, If you are a white admissions officer, which most AOs are, holding the FA cookie jar of sorts, you sure need to take comfort in the fact that poor white kids are well-served. Visit any BS campus and do the survey and you’ll feel very happy.</p>
<p>As the parent of an “economically disadvantaged white applicant”, all I can say is is that the process worked okay for us…son was waitlisted at schools for, I suspect, FA reasons, but accepted at the one school he really wanted. I can’t argue at all with the way admissions decisions are made despite our mixed results; I’m truly glad that my kid goes to school with such a diverse mix of students, including those who came up through ABC. </p>
<p>This whole argument strikes me as far too abstract.</p>
<p>Reverse racism is prevalent in more areas than scholarships…
Job quotas and university acceptance are two of the worst. As a white male I take it as a compliment. I am more respected and expected to succeed than a black or hispanic, therefore I have to give them a substantial head start and propel them along their journey. It’s okay, once race REALLY doesn’t matter, I will be able to respect all equally. But for now, while my acceptance at ivy league schools is cut in half because I am white, my belief that I truly am superior to other inferior minorities is simply reinforced. Screw having my opportunities removed in the country that my ancestors founded.</p>
<p>One thing among others that surprises me in this discussion is that some posters self identified as AA have never acknowledged in any way that anything positive ever comes out of “affirmative action” and other measures of similar nature. And they don’t admit ever prep schools and colleges give any preferential treatment based on their race. Moreover, apparently most scholarship money goes to poor white kids, rich black families are full pay, black alumni are donating big bucks to pay for the scholarships to poor white kids… Well I guess all this can be true in certain context but do you rely believe it is a true reflection of the reality? Seeing this ultra defensiveness does convince me that there is a long way to go to a “race blind” world.</p>
<p>Per boarding school review, 27% of Deerfield students are students of color. 14% are international. 35% of students receive financial aid. If the international students are students of color who don’t receive financial aid, (I know this is not precisely true, but for estimating) 35% - 13% = 22%. Even if all students of color at Deerfield receive financial aid, 22% of Deerfield students receive financial aid, but are not students of color.</p>
<p>40% of Hotchkiss students are students of color. 15% are international students. 36% receive financial aid. 11% of Hotchkiss students receive financial aid, but aren’t international students, nor students of color.</p>
<p>I am not trying to argue that all the minority families are wealthy, and all the white families are poor. There are full-pay minority families. There are white children who receive financial aid. All the schools try to enroll diverse classes, to the limits of their financial aid budgets. Andover and Exeter share the mission to recruit “youth from every quarter.” As far as I can tell, they try as hard as they can to fulfill that mission.</p>
<p>To the OP:
Yep it is called “reverse discrimination”. The Great great great great great grandchildren of all being punished for the bad deeds of a few. Trustees need to take a long hard look now, especially after being led nationally by a black President, if they want to continue inflicting the guilt issue on future bright upcoming generations by exposing them to reverse discrimination. For instance, having quotas is fine, but prep school “societies of color”, where whites need not apply seems a bit out there these days.</p>
<p>The President is 50% white. It took 230 years to get there. As recent as 60 years ago, AAs were segregated with no equal rights. Just the facts from the history book. Never heard of prep school societies where whites need not apply.</p>
<p>Thanks for your post. And belated congratulations on your child’s acceptance to Exeter, I believe. I am sure your child’s experiences at prep school are a concrete source of satisfaction for you. It would be wonderful if more families in this rotten economy could share your joy as well. </p>
<ol>
<li> Periwinkle,</li>
</ol>
<p>Thank you for citing the article from the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, a publication dedicated to fighting racism.</p>
<p>As the article importantly observes, “credible research show[s] that most minority students at Harvard, Princeton, and Yale come from high-income families.” This illuminating fact explodes the myth “that the 1960s protest movement that produced aggressive college recruitment of ‘ghetto kids’ continues today.” Thus, affirmative action, which was designed to “bring … significant numbers of low-income and often underqualified blacks to America’s elite campuses,” now mostly benefits black applicants “from high income families.”</p>
<p>This article has important implications for the OP since prep school admission policies often mirror the ones Harvard, Yale, and Princeton employ. It raises the distinct possibility that diversity at prep schools primarily consists in bringing wealthy “youth from every quarter." Hence, it underscores the necessity of increasing economic diversity by limiting affirmative action to poor URMs and extending a comparable admission hook to underprivileged white, Asian, and Indian students.</p>
<ol>
<li> ThomasJeffersonI,</li>
</ol>
<p>Thanks for the chuckle. Where in the world did you get the idea that I am a “white admissions officer”? Please see my previous comments for a substantive response to your post.</p>
<p>It’s not reverse discrimination when schools make deliberate choices to build a particular kind of student body. In the case of many schools, that still means a mostly white, mostly affluent population. In some cases, it means an ethnically, economically, geographically diverse population. </p>
<p>They are private schools. They can invite anyone they want to the party. We choose which party we feel most comfortable trying to get invited to. If I wanted my kid to go to a school where people were accepted on a merit-based, race-blind basis, I could doubtless find such a school to apply to. We preferred schools that wanted many different voices from many different walks of life. </p>
<p>Many white, working to middle class kids like mine are accepted to boarding school with FA. There are people of color who have made life choices that enable them to afford to send their kids to expensive private school. There are people who use programs like ABC so that their kids can rise out of poverty. There are wealthy people of all colors who believe strongly in their former schools mission and give so that others with less money can have the opportunity they had. Throwing out terms like reverse discrimination diminishes the dignity and effort of all of these people.</p>
<p>Periwinkle,
I’d like to see a research on how many White or Asian kids are from middle to high income families in elite colleges/prep schools. Being from middle or even high income families doesn’t mean they are not receiving financial aid (go figure). </p>
<p>Note that my argument was not about whether more financial aid money goes to white or black students. I was simply pointing out that some posters wouldn’t acknowledge the fact that there is indeed some preferential treatment in college/prep school admission based on race. The article you referenced is actually supports a larger point made here by Jmilton: Should the preference treatment in admission if any be given based on skin color or based on students/families’ socioeconmomic status? Granted diversity in race and ethnicity is a dimension of diversity but is it really helping “leveling the playing field” if they focus on looking good on paper by boasting the percentage of students of color at the expense of putting kids in desperate need of this sort of help whether they are black or white?</p>