Advantage to be a URM?

[abelinkin60]

<p>I do not mean this in any offensive way, but is it true that african americans have a higher chance of acceptance than whites or asians with similar accomplishments?</p>

<p>These may just be rumors but ive heard of african americans with lower scores or accomplishments getting in over whites or asians with higher accomplihsments. and i know its not all scores and accomplishments but im just really curious as to whether there is any truth in it at all.</p>

[bookannelida]

<p>abelinkin60 - check out the “Consolidated EA/RD 2015 results thread”. Assuming it contains valid reports, it should answer your question.</p>

[Decibel]

<p>@Abelinkin60:</p>

<p>When you look at the Results thread as mentioned in the above post, you will find an African-American’s stats claiming him to get in with a SAT score of 1840.</p>

[bookannelida]

<p>Decibel, I can recall even lower scores than that in that thread…</p>

[molliebatmit]

<p>This is not at all the thread where I want to get into this, but I will note a few things:

[ul][<em>]MIT does not publish accepted student statistics by race, so anything anyone hears on this topic is based on anecdotes and rumors, not on data.
[</em>]People who post their stats on CC are not necessarily telling the truth. In the past, I have confirmed with the admissions officers that some posters on the results threads claiming to be low-stat URM admits did not, in fact, fit the profile of any admitted students.
Corollary a. Trolls like to ■■■■■.
Corollary b. Confirmation bias afflicts even the most ostentatiously fair-minded of us.
[*]3. MIT is committed to enrolling a diverse class, and looks at applications holistically when deciding which small number of the amazingly qualified applicants they will admit. Race, economic background, and available opportunities are all factors considered in evaluating the history and potential of an applicant.[/ul]</p>

[abelinkin60]

<p>then why is race asked for on applications? shouldnt they decided without looking at that, sorta like how they decide without looking at financial things first?</p>

[snipersas]

<p>

I do not mean this in any offensive way, but is it true that african americans have a higher chance of acceptance than whites or asians with similar accomplishments?

</p>

<p>There was actually a study done on this topic a few years ago by a professor at Princeton. As you might imagine for a peer-reviewed study, the dataset analyzed was rather solid:</p>

<p>

@methods

Logistic regression analysis is used to link information on the admission decision for 124,374 applications to applicants’ SAT scores, race, athletic ability, and legacy status, among other variables.

</p>

<p>And the results supported what most people believed - the bonus associated with being black worked out to 230 points on the old SAT, or around 350 points on the current one, over an otherwise identical white candidate, or about 430 points over an otherwise identical Asian one.</p>

<p>The numbers are substantial, though several caveats do exist. First, the data set used is now several years old, so changing admissions standards might have since thrown the numbers off. Second, the data set used was an aggregate “basket” of several highly selective schools (which may or may not include MIT), so it is doubtful that MIT’s numbers match this number exactly. Still, given the published makeup of each incoming class at MIT and elsewhere it is probable that such preferences still exist - the only highly selective school that does not practice any affirmative action whatsoever is Caltech, and their incoming class usually runs around 1% Black versus 10% for many of their peer schools.</p>

<p>So to answer your question - yes, probably, but as schools don’t regularly publish their admissions datasets, it’s unlikely you will ever know the exact number without a very good friend in the admissions office.</p>

<p>Source can be found here:
<a href=“http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf[/url]”>http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[molliebatmit]

<p>

then why is race asked for on applications? shouldnt they decided without looking at that, sorta like how they decide without looking at financial things first?

Well, just to clarify, your family’s economic situation is absolutely considered in the application process, just not your family’s ability to pay for MIT. If your family has limited financial resources and you’ve still managed to put together a compelling application, that’s considered a good thing. “Need-blind” means that the financial aid office won’t tell the admissions office that they can’t afford to accept you because of financial need, not that the admissions office doesn’t consider financial hardship when admitting students.</p>

<p>So factors like race, economic hardship, and available local/regional resources absolutely come into play, as, IMO, they should. Is there a particular reason that applicants who came into the process with a leg up due to fortunate circumstances beyond their control should be privileged over those who didn’t?</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>MIT practices affirmative action, as does nearly every other university in the country. This is no secret. Whether it is fair is something people disagree about, however the OP was not asking about whether it was fair.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>“First, the data set used is now several years old”</p>

<p>Yes. The article says the data is from 83, 93, and and 97.</p>

<p>“added weight in admission decisions to applicants who have SAT
scores above 1500, are African American, or are recruited athletes”</p>

<p>I also believe the 230 point advantage was primarily for blacks scoring above a certain threshold. Was it 1200 on the old SAT? </p>

<p>“The penalty for scoring less than 1200 on the SAT is significantly greater for African-American and Hispanic students than the penalty for white students who score less than 1200 (Model 2). Similarly,the reward (i.e., increased likelihood of admission) that is produced by scoring more than 1300 is significantly smaller for African-American and especially for Hispanic students than the reward for white students who score more than 1300. Thus, we find that the underrepresented minority advantage is greatest for African-American and Hispanic applicants with SAT scores in the 1200–1300 range”</p>

<p>So one or two percent of blacks taking the test in that era?</p>

<p>And this was interesting…
“This would mean that the admission advantage for African-American
athletes, for example, is equivalent to the sum of the separate bonuses for
being either African American or an athlete. Our results point to a different
conclusion. Models 5 through 7 show that having any two out of the three
preferred characteristics (underrepresented minority student, athlete, or legacy)
confers an admission advantage that is less than the advantage that results
from adding the separate bonuses. For example, the main effects for ‘‘African
American’’ and ‘‘athlete’’ in Model 5 imply admission advantages equivalent
to 240 and 210 SAT points, respectively. But the interaction term for being
both African American and an athlete amounts to the loss of roughly 110
points.”</p>

<p>Irrelevant on most of cc, I know, but for the record, it also said “Underrepresented minority student status made almost no difference to admission chances at the less selective four-year institutions attended by 80 percent of students”</p>

<p>Does anybody know how many blacks are in the freshman class at MIT this year?</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>“the only highly selective school that does not practice any affirmative action whatsoever is Caltech, and their incoming class usually runs around 1% Black versus 10% for many of their peer schools.”</p>

<p>Which peer schools are 10% black?</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

Which peer schools are 10% black?

</p>

<p>From a Tech article on the demographics of the MIT’s 2011 class
<a href=“http://tech.mit.edu/V127/N31/admissions.html[/url]”>http://tech.mit.edu/V127/N31/admissions.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

African Americans make up 9 percent of the class, comparable to the Class of 2010’s 8 percent but an increase from the 6 percent of the previous three classes. (See the tables on page 10 for additional statistics.)</p>

<p>The remaining Class of 2011 is 38 percent Caucasian, 26 percent Asian American, 7 percent Mexican American, 1 percent Native American, 2 percent Puerto Rican, and 3 percent other Hispanic. One percent is of other ethnic descent, 8 percent are international students whose ethnicity was not polled, and 5 percent did not respond.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>With the international students (which aren’t polled for ethnicity,) this may come out to 10%.</p>

<p>I will add that a contributing factors to 1% Caltech AA number in that they may not want to go there.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>Does Caltech have any other peers that may come out to 10%? Or 9? Or 8%? In 2010, Columbia had 14, Stanford 8, and HYP about 7 each, but I’m not sure if those are considered peers.</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

Does Caltech have any other peers that may come out to 10%? Or 9? Or 8%? In 2010, Columbia had 14, Stamford 8, and HYP about 7 each, but I’m not sure if those are considered peers.

</p>

<p>Normally, when people refer to Caltech’s peers, they are referring to HYP and MIT. The only other high level techy schools I can think of that people could be referring to are Harvey Mudd and Olin. I have no idea what Harvey Mudd’s demographics are, and Olin is kind of an unusual school so I don’t think it’s really comparable.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>Class of 2015 is 9.5 AA at Yale, 12 at Harvard!</p>

[PiperXP]

<p>MIT’s affirmative action refers to trying to find accomplished URMs and encouraging them to apply to MIT – not giving them the easy route into MIT.</p>

<p>MIT is hard. Like, really. Letting in people who can’t handle it does no one any favors.</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

MIT is hard. Like, really. Letting in people who can’t handle it does no one any favors.

</p>

<p>This is true.</p>

<p>

MIT’s affirmative action refers to trying to find accomplished URMs and encouraging them to apply to MIT – not giving them the easy route into MIT.

</p>

<p>Yes, but if that was all they did, then it wouldn’t be racial affirmative action. In the strict sense, if they get a non-URM and URM application, the URM app is favored if they are roughly similar in terms of accomplishments even if the socioeconomic situation is the same. Even if the URM has somewhat less accomplishments, they may still be favored. How much they are favored, of course, varies from school to school, and no one really knows how much they are favored at MIT. </p>

<p>At MIT, like you said, they need to be careful that people can actually do the work. At MIT, unlike ivies, it’s not easy to coast so this term “do the work” actually means something.</p>

[MITChris]

<p>I’m too tired of talking about this subject other than to say two things: </p>

<p>1) We don’t admit anyone to MIT who is not sufficiently prepared to succeed at MIT. And anyone who was admitted to MIT presented a compelling reason to admit them. Marginally higher test scores - that is, differences in test scores beyond the point of sufficient academic preparation - are not compelling reasons for admission, period. </p>

<p>2) [Putting</a> Diversity into Context | MIT Admissions](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/which-box-should-i-check]Putting”>Putting Diversity into Context | MIT Admissions)</p>

<p>

@DLDJ

I read a recent NY Times piece, dealing with multiracial students and the dilemma of racial identification on college application forms, with great interest.</p>

<p>In my role as the Director of Minority Recruitment, I have fielded numerous calls and emails soliciting advice on how to complete the race and ethnicity section of the MIT admission application. When the questions began, I will admit to being a little perplexed by what seemed to be widespread confusion.</p>

<p>When I was a kid, I recall having to identify my race on all kinds of forms, including standardized tests, long before I contemplated completing an application for college admission. From my perspective, checking the box, or boxes to indicate one’s race should be as automatic as providing one’s name. As Chris Peterson, once put it, “If you have to pause, for more than a second or two, to pick your race or ethnicity, you’re doing it wrong.”</p>

<p>If anything, the ability to check multiple boxes should make it easier to identify one’s race. In my experience, individuals from multiracial backgrounds resented having to choose one race over another, and now they no longer have to.</p>

<p>While I try to avoid being overly cynical, it has been my sense that very little of the confusion is actually about racial identity and identification. In reality, most of the confusion is about how to best leverage a dimension of one’s personal background to maximize the likelihood of admission in a highly selective college admissions process. Instinctively, I knew this to be true, but most students are unwilling to state this outright. In that respect, I appreciate the spotlight that is now shining brightly on this issue. My concern is that the spotlight is focused on the wrong area.</p>

<p>Many colleges and universities value multiple forms of diversity in their student populations. This diversity may include students that are first-generation to college, students from a variety of geographical regions, students from different racial and ethnic backgrounds or any number of other qualities and characteristics.</p>

<p>While one’s race can certainly come into play in a college admissions decision, the actual impact bears no resemblance to the common perception that checking a single box somehow guarantees a pathway to admission. What most people either fail to recognize or appreciate, is that amongst a host of factors ranging from academic preparation to institutional priorities, the factor that is both most salient, and most likely to swing an admission decision in a highly selective process, is what an applicant makes of the opportunities that are available to them. While I acknowledge that this may seem like an oversimplification, it takes into account both the disadvantages that one may have to cope with as a function of coming from a low-income family or attending an under-resourced school, as well as the advantages that one might experience living in a highly educated household or attending an affluent suburban high school.</p>

<p>Regardless of one’s background, if an applicant maximizes the opportunities that are available to them, they should be a viable candidate for admission to a highly selective college or university because they are likely to both take advantage of the myriad opportunities that exist in those settings and have a positive impact on the campus community. If an applicant has to create their own opportunities because none are available to them, admissions officers typically get excited about the prospect of such a student stepping foot onto a resource and opportunity rich campus. Conversely, if an applicant has abundant opportunities and chooses to pass on them, they are likely increasing the chances that an admissions committee at a highly selective institution is going to choose to pass on their application.</p>

<p>Most institutions that place a premium on diversity utilize a much broader definition of diversity than what can be captured or satisfied by a simple check box. The most selective institutions scrutinize applications with sufficient rigor to easily differentiate between disingenuous applicants, who are simply looking for an edge in the admissions process, and the authentic applicants that are the most likely to truly enrich the incoming class and the greater campus community.

</p>

[snipersas]

<p>

We don’t admit anyone to MIT who is not sufficiently prepared to succeed at MIT. And anyone who was admitted to MIT presented a compelling reason to admit them. Marginally higher test scores - that is, differences in test scores beyond the point of sufficient academic preparation - are not compelling reasons for admission, period.

</p>

<p>I don’t think that anyone disputes that all MIT admits are well qualified - with the current borderline-insane admit rates it (you?) could tailor the class to fit any number of priorities and still have a brilliant group of students every year. The question comes when choosing among qualified candidates, who will you pick, and what is the relative probability of any given decision? The original poster asked for help because he is a URM and because there isn’t much in the way of guidance for people in his situation - posts on the results threads by White & Asian applicants here on CC will not reflect his own experience with admissions and as mollie has noted, the “URM” responses to those threads here on CC are mostly ■■■■■■, so there’s no accurate information from that side. Quantification of the URM bonus allows for an apples-to-apples comparison between previous decisions and between ethnic groups, which is helpful.</p>

<p>By the way - the study posted earlier did not calculate admissions advantage based upon an individual’s score on the SAT - it was calculated from admissions probabilities for a pair of otherwise identical students of varying ethnicity. The numbers were just converted to SAT scores since that’s a simple metric of comparison.</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

The question comes when choosing among qualified candidates, who will you pick, and what is the relative probability of any given decision?

</p>

<p>No one who actually knows this (i.e., someone who works in admissions) is going to tell you. Other people who offer opinions have really only anecdotal experience.</p>