A necessary post for URM's

<p>This can go for anyone with "subpar" stats that apply to reaches and get in, but the majority of people that face discrimination are URM's.</p>

<p>URM has become a derogatory term and an excuse for people on CC and students in the United States. I know how the pain associated with being labeled a URM who only got a job, into college, etc because of his ethnicity over the "more qualified" ORM.</p>

<p>I want to reassure you that if your test scores are lower, your accomplishments fewer in number, or anything else that you ARE NOT DUMBER. People on CC praise the 2300+ SAT 3.9+ GPA and automatically label them as intelligent. Of course they must have some intelligence to accomplish those stats, but schools are too diverse and preparation too different to allow for SAT and GPA comparison to be reliable from school to school.</p>

<p>Life varies from city to city, state to state, country to country, and it is the society that you live in and culture you retain that shape you. Coming from a small town with few resources or a large town with vast resources will, without a doubt, shape your intellectual side--they do not, however, determine your potential. Also, being from an asian, hispanic, white, etc family will change the way you live, the way you grow, and the way you act.</p>

<p>This being said, I would like to use myself as an example. My family is a supportive hispanic family that is very close. When someone needs help, one is expected to aid them immediately w/o questions. For my family, education is important, but not of the utmost importance. Going through school, my parents supported me but didn't expect me to excel, nor did the push me or require me to do anything beyond my personal best. The same, however, cannot be said for my asian friends--we would have to make up projects/study sessions so they could come over to play with us while their parents thought we were studying. (This mainly applied to my Chinese friend, but not so much to my Korean or Japanese friend)</p>

<p>I continued to do what I thought was best in school, never acting against my will and constantly questioning what I wanted to learn, why, etc. I did not put too much emphasis on grades and tests, but I did put emphasis on understanding. In high school, I became bored with the class difficulty--I would almost always receive B+ to A- w/o any effort regardless of the class difficulty. My school was, in so many words, easy. There weren't many resources, (it's a public school in deep south texas) and I wasn't asked to do much as I was already taking the hardest courseload ever given in my school (4 AP's by the end of 10th with a 4 average on the exam).</p>

<p>Junior year, sick of the inadequacies of my school, I chose to take my courses at a recently opened IB school. It was small with classes averaging thirty people in size and with the best teachers in my area; there was plenty of room for me to get the attention I wanted, and hopefully be challenged.</p>

<p>Junior year, I began to see the benefits of attentive teachers that actually cared about teaching. My math teacher challenged me, and my physics teacher did the same by teaching me relativistic physics after school once a week. I still maintained the lax attitude about grades/test scores my entire life, but I was learning a lot and was happy--I did what I wanted to, not what I was forced to do. </p>

<p>Senior year rolled along and everything was going great, but then I began to apply to colleges and realized my stats were subpar. I thought: "I won't get in because my stats aren't great and I only did what I wanted in terms of EC's, and maybe it is because I'm dumb." I retained that mentality partially because of my old teachers that never congratulated me, were apathetic toward their students, etc.</p>

<p>I didn't really feel the impact of being a URM until I got my acceptance letters back. Out of the five (UT, MIT, Rice, Princeton, Cornell) that I applied to, I was accepted at four--this is not at all what I expected. I never spoke about it to anyone because there were many that were rejected except I did tell my close friend who I forgot had a loud mouth. One day, on my way to UIL Math practice (an academic competition) my friend (the valedictorian currently at Yale) tells my coach (never was one of my teachers BTW) about my acceptances and her response is: "Well, he is a minority". This was after I won district in Team Chemistry without a partner for her. The same crap kept being stated to me over and over again essentially telling me I'm dumb and I took another more deserving kids place. The only people to congratulate me were my Physics teacher and Math teacher.</p>

<p>Needless to say, after my first semester of college I realized that I am not dumb by any means and that intelligence CANNOT be evaluated by an exam. Many of the people at Rice that enter are among the top applicants in the nation with stellar stats, amazing awards, etc. I entered Rice with 18 hours--none for math and physics because they are stingy with IB credits. My counsler, in his opinion, recommended me for the simplest and easiest courseload possible telling me that: "I believe these classes will challenge you plenty based on your test scores, incoming credits, etc". (he knew nothing about IB, but he knew I didn't have 50+ hours like many freshman AP'ers).</p>

<p>I ignored his advice and signed up with 18 hours with 3 hours of research and two sophmore level honor math and physics courses. While many ORM superachievers struggled to get past a 3.0 with the bare minimum difficulty, I managed a 3.5 without working my absolute hardest (I did try--I do not mean to sound cocky). They did not know how to adjust to college is partially the reason.</p>

<p>What is the point of this entire rant?</p>

<p>I want to give you "lucky" "underachievers" who got into good schools hope and confidence that you got in because you deserve it and not because you are dumb. I also want to make one point clear:</p>

<p>It is not what you did in high school or what college you got into that matters, it is what you do with it. </p>

<p>Whether you were the average Joe that managed to get into a superreach, or the overachieving statfreak that got rejected everywhere, your education does not stop when you get into college--it has only begun. You must learn to act and think for yourself, otherwise you might crash and burn in college with the freedom, and you must, most importantly, not compare yourself to others based on what colleges one was accepted to because that attitude will lead to failure.</p>

<p>I have more to say but I think this sums up everything fairly well.</p>

<p>Info: *I was required to take the exam in 7th because of Duke TIP, nor did I ever prep for the exam. I post this because I want everyone to see the difference good teachers can make (shown by 11th and 12th)</p>

<p>SAT in 7th grade (1000, 400 reading 600 math)
SAT in 11th (1230, 700 math, 530 reading)
SAT in 12th (2150, 760 math, 670 reading, 720 writing (12/12))</p>

<p>SAT II's in 12th (2150, 780 math iic, 760 chem, 610 US. hist)</p>

<p>AMC 12 in 12th (103.5)</p>

<p>AIME in 12th (7)</p>

<p>Down with AA.</p>

<p>"Down with AA."
Save D, did you actually read the op?<br>
What an asinine reaction to a genuinely moving story.</p>

<p><em>applauds</em></p>

<p>I love UIL btw!</p>

<p>Yep, I read it. I would actually say I'm in agreement with the OP.</p>

<p>He can agree with the OP, there is no reason to believe my viewpoint is correct. I would just like to ask why.</p>

<p>Wow strong patting self on the back. I wish I could not try and get into Princeton.</p>

<p>You didn't read my post obviously.</p>

<p>I did try, but it was because I wanted to. I studied what I wanted to because I loved to study. The point is people are changing who they are to get into college. It is supposed to happen naturally. You do what you like, apply where you want to go and go where you get accepted. Students, for some odd reason, believe they MUST be perfect in every area which is just plain wrong. Look at famous scientists, were any of them literary geniuses? Possibly, but most likely not.</p>

<p>My roommate, who I love because he is like me but asian, is the perfect example of a good student. He does well in the areas he is interested in (well is an understatement... the guy is amazing) and that is it. He does not try to kick ass everywhere (he took the SAT once for *** sake and was happy with a 2150 and got into Cal Tech because he didn't care about his 550 writing). </p>

<p>Oh, I didn't get into Princeton BTW.</p>

<p>OP stands for original poster, which you are. I agree with you for the most part: AA just fuels racism, and it's hurting everybody. There would be 8% more black lawyers who are partners in a law firm if not for AA: an African-American with a degree from a prestigious university is not as likely to make partner as say, a Jew with the same degree from the same place. </p>

<p>However, you seem to not realize that you really probably would not have gotten into those schools if not for AA. There is a tremendous amount of truth to this. You're obviously not dumb, but I can't imagine myself getting your stats and still getting into those schools. Sorry.</p>

<p>Well, I believe I would've gotten into 1 or 2 of my reaches.</p>

<p>SAT: 2150
SAT II's: 2150
GPA: 3.5
Class Rank: 15/458
AMC 12: 103.5
AIME: 7
National Constitution Team 4th place
1st Dan Tae Kwon Do
State Photoshop champ
U.I.L awards
etc</p>

<p>I have many qualifications that I believe got me in, yet people still said AA got me in. To some degree this must be true, but it wasn't the only factor. For MIT, my interview went amazingly well--he called me back 2 days later to talk for another 3 hours just for fun. I also sent an architecture thing I was working on senior year with my Art teacher which I guess they liked.</p>

<p>I say, down with AA, but up with Econ AA or regional AA because resources and location are greater hinderance to learning than race.</p>

<p>"I say, down with AA, but up with Econ AA or regional AA because resources and location are greater hinderance to learning than race."</p>

<p><em>applause</em></p>

<p>I'm still for affirmative action, but I do also agree that it should be tweaked. I agree with OP about having more of a focus on the econmic status of the applicant and the region where they attend(although, even the regional can be tough, unless the school really knows neighborhoods well. For example, you can live in "Seattle, WA", and live in a 10 million dollar home, or live in a one bedroom apartment, and literally live on the same road that bisects the city.)</p>

<p>I think AA is neccesary, and I think that race should still play a partial role in it. I think the pecking order ought to be economic status>race>region</p>

<p>Nice post, I'm sick of people jumping to conclusions that so and so wouldn't get into what ever college if they were not black/Hispanic.</p>

<p>Well, undeniably, though the use of AA, less talented and less intelligent people are getting accepted to elite univerisites and are getting more job offers than those who are more qualified for the spot.</p>

<p>This does not mean that URMS who get in with lower stats are not qualified, they are simply less qualified. And this does not include all URMs, obviously.</p>

<p>It seems like URM are people of minority decent that get into colleges due to that fact and ORM are not but could someone tell me what the acroynms actually stand for? Thanks</p>

<p>under/over represented minorities</p>

<p>"Well, undeniably, though the use of AA, less talented and less intelligent people are getting accepted to elite univerisites and are getting more job offers than those who are more qualified for the spot.</p>

<p>This does not mean that URMS who get in with lower stats are not qualified, they are simply less qualified. And this does not include all URMs, obviously."</p>

<p>The problem with qualification is determining what makes one qualified. Numbers cannot say whether one is qualified in every sense of the word. My stats were "mediocre" (to CC standards) for those schools, but I was qualified, in my opinion, because I did not try to change myself to get into college, I studied what I loved with all my ability, and have the ability to do well in college.</p>

<p>Regarding the OP's post on how Chinese parents are insanely strict, </p>

<p>I doubt that Chinese parents are strict. Most tend to be far more lax than their Japanese and Korean counterparts. One of my korean friends, accepted to stanford, told me his dad would beat him if he did not study. Another of my friends, Asahiro, told me his parents would not feed him if he did not do well on tests. </p>

<p>It has to do with culture I suppose. Although Chinese parents tend to value learning, there is a history of wanting to have a child grow up balanced rather than a booknerd. aka "wen wu shuang quan" = "Literature and Martial arts, the two fists"</p>

<p>^I agree. My Korean friend wasn't allowed to go out with friends at all for any reason from the last week of August until she was accepted to college (even though she had all her apps completely done)
My Chinese friend's parents are pretty relaxed</p>

<p>Asians are not all like that, but many Koreans, Chinese, and Japanese face those problems. It really differs from family to family though.</p>