<p>I wonder how much good ol' AA mattered this year. Let's see some scores, races, and results!</p>
<p>Not to rain on your parade ... but URM's are unlikely to want to post the full range of statistics. I'm sure some URM's got accepted with scores that are more toward the lower end of the middle 50% rather than the higher end ... or even with scores in the bottom 25% of accepted students. </p>
<p>Then, this could turn into a debate on how schools lower their standards for URM's. Someone will make claims about how important diversity is. Other people will chime in with arguments about socioeconomic needs. Then people will say how civil rights leaders believed that people should not be judged by the color of their skin but should be judged by the content of their character. Then someone will mention arguments about historical discrimination.</p>
<p>All I can say is that this site is a hotbed for complaints about affirmative action, and I think you'd find a good deal of students who would argue that a race-based advantage is the most biased advantage one can possibly recieve. Therefore ... I advise you to steer any discussion on this thread away from such a debate. </p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>jprencipe, what's so bad about a debate? Will we not debate important issues because we are afraid of passionate and articulated answers?</p>
<p>Nothing is wrong with a debate. However, the debate of affirmative action has really been overdone on this site. I've seen one thread about a URM's chances balloon into a ten page flame fest on AA. I'm just expressing the concern that the original topic of discussion is often lost when a wild debate on such an hackneyed topic begins. Just by doing a site search on affirmative action, I think one could find volumes and volumes of information, and well, I just don't think there's a need to repeat that on this thread.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>I agree with Joey, many people are too tense and jumpy about this issue on this site.</p>
<p>Yeah, I know. I'm trying to get them to loosen up.</p>
<p>Yeah, but the debate's been done... there's nothing provable about it, it's just a bunch of opinions. Which is not a debate.</p>
<p>I'd have to argue that there are tons of statistics and facts describing how afifrmative action works ... so one should be able to have a debate. But we definitely need to loosen up around CC.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>This is my inaugural post, so I'm excited. </p>
<p>Moving on to the subject at hand, as a Black male, I'd like to relate some first-hand experiences about AA, and ease some of those fears that many of my racial majority friends have.</p>
<p>By the way, I'm from the Chicago Area. I go to a competitive public high school in the far west suburbs.</p>
<p>I earned a 33 on my ACT, which converts roughly to a 1470 on the SAT I. I have a 3.848 / 4.0 GPA, and I have a butt-load of extra-curriculars and achievements, including national awards for musical composition and numerous nationally competitive scholarship awards. In addition, I have accumulated about 1,100 hours of community service, and I organized a neighborhood book drive that collected over 2,000 used books for a low-income daycare in my area. My class rank sucks: 169/742, so I might be SOL on that. But my school is competitive, as we have the 7th highest average ACT score in Illinois.</p>
<p>And most importantly, I am not a Columbia applicant. I did apply to HYP, along with Dartmouth and Cornell.</p>
<p>Affirmative Action all comes down to supply and demand. The Ivy League and colleges in general have universally agreed that diversity is essential to a good college experience. This diversity isn't just racial. That is why people with EC's stand a better chance than those without EC's. If Columbia needs composers, than those who can write music are in luck. If Columbia needs chemistry buffs, then those cats who got 800's on their SAT II Chem tests are in the money. And if Columbia needs academically qualified Black people, then Black people are in luck. And Columbia...all the Ivies need qualified Blacks badly.</p>
<p>AA exists on two levels. First has to do with recruitment. This is less of a problem at Columbia, whose location in the middle of Manhattan is much more attractive to Black students than Dartmouth, which is literally in the middle of nowhere. Keep in mind that we are talking about less than 800 kids every year. Ivies have to fight through all that, plus the image they have in the Black community, as lily-white, prissy, condescending, subtly racist, pretentious, arrogant... you get the idea. I received a letter from every single Ivy League school, with the exception of Yale (cheapo's only sent me a post card...I don't expect to get in).</p>
<p>Assuming they can attract qualified Black students to apply, then they have the supply and demand thing to deal with. The problem is that there aren't enough Black students to fill the demand. And anybody in A.P Econ will tell you that when the demand exceeds supply, than consumers (Ivies) will do more to get what they're after. Were talking about a small group of kids. Less than 1,000 Black students scored over a 1400 on the SAT or 32 on the ACT last year. A similar grouping of kids, 800 in total, earn National Achievement Finalist status from the PSAT (I am one of those finalists, by the way) Of that 1,000, subtract Historically Black Colleges, which are far more prestigious in the eyes of the Black community than in the eyes of the general public. Then subtract the kids who opt for large state schools that offer butt-loads of money. I can't tell you how many letters I have from schools like U of Iowa, U of Florida, and Iowa State etc telling me how much money they'll give me. What we are left with are probably 200-300 kids who have Ivy League schools as their first choice. When they apply, they get in. What choice do the Ivies have? They don't want to compromise their academic standards too much, but they'll give some wiggle room.</p>
<p>How does this translate into the larger context of admissions? Well, I imagine that Harvard will get substantial numbers of applicants who scored higher than me, have better EC's and achievements, and have better GPA's. However, they can't afford to cast too many kids like me to the wayside, because there simply aren't many qualified Blacks to choose from as qualified Whites. So think of it as a kind of hook. The only difference is that this hook is inherent, while most hooks are earned.</p>
<p>In the end, what we have is a higher accept rate for Blacks than for the population at large.</p>
<p>Is it fair, no, but neither is college admissions. Some people are born with musical ability, is it fair that that should be a factor. Some people are born with athletic ability, is it fair that they should stand a better chance of getting it. This is the real kicker: some people are born smarter than other people, is it fair that Ivies accept them more than other people. Nothing about this entire process is fair, which is why it is such a great experience for teenagers. I think it teaches a great lesson.</p>
<p>My only real problem with AA is that it creates a climate of racial division, where the automatic assumption is that Black students cannot function on the same level with their White counterparts. This assumption, whether people like to admit it or not, is the reason the first person posted the question.</p>
<p>I know I'm not doing the less serious thing, but I think a rational sit-down conversation about AA is good, seeing as though our generation, as the future policy-makers of the country, will have to deal with it (in the U of Michigan AA cases, SCOTUS ruled that AA would need to be revisited by the government in 25 years). So feel free to chime in. </p>
<p>Peace.</p>
<p>All I can say is I agree with the previous post. There's no formula for colleges to admit students...I did well on SAT's and have a good GPA but people probably got rejected with better. It's all supply and demand. A girl from my school was a professional dancer and got into Stanford with a below 1100 SAT score. So quit complaining about affirmative action and find some other way to stand out. I'm not an URM, I'm asian, female, and Californian..a popular group that applies to Columbia</p>
<p>Nicely put intellectually, kb54010...I would actually put that in the other forums if I were you. More people need to read this. (i.e. people who drink too much "Hatorade" ;))</p>
<p>Considering that Columbia, Barnard, TC blends right into Harlem, the schools have not only made a commitment to affirmative action but also a commitment to the neighborhood in which the school resides in as being one of the largest employers of harlem residents (University, Hospitals) and through educational initiatives for high school students as the STEP (science and technology entry program) the liberty partnership and a thriving HEOP population.</p>
<p>I think if you are going to have issues with AA, and then Columbia and NYC (which is one of the most diverse cities in the country) and especially the politically active harlem neighborhood may not be the best palce for you.</p>
<p>First of all, I would like to thank kb54010 for his honest and fair presentation of the forces behind minority admissions. I am also very glad he made the choice to post his profile and his college choices for us.</p>
<p>I would most certainly agree that extremely qualified African American, Hispanic, and Native American students are a hot commodity in college admissions. EVERY college wants to have a "critical mass" of African American and Hispanic students. I doubt it would be possible to create such a critical mass of Native American students (since there are simply so few), but the idea of creating diversity without isolating those who are doing the job is implicit in college affirmative action policies.</p>
<p>I think when people gripe about affirmative action (and believe me, I've griped about it before), they complain for a number of reasons, real or imagined. I know of people complain that a URM "took their seat" at a top choice college. It's probably an imagined fear that any one minority student took their place, but to maintain a "critical mass" of minority students, a significant number of minority students must be admitted. And well, 10-15% of the class having an "edge" makes a difference for the general numbers. </p>
<p>I don't think that anyone reasonable would WILLINGLY give preferential treatment to someone else because of something as arbitrary as skin color. However, Ivies are often forced to ascribe to preferential treatment based on race to maintain their critical masses. Standards, unfortunately, are often lowered, because all eight Ivy leagues MUST admit more than just the very well-qualified "200-300 kids who have Ivy League schools as their first choice." </p>
<p>As a rule, the very well qualified group of minority kids will always be admitted to Ivy League colleges, even though I'm sure even the very-well qualified group would experience significant disappointment if they were unhooked. This is, of course, as many very-well qualified but unhooked students often are disappointed. </p>
<p>But at the very least, to maintain diversity, the Ivy League colleges cannot deny qualified minority students that meet the standards for general admits. They cannot afford to lump minority students with the unhooked kids; that would equate to much less diversity on college campuses. Put another way, colleges cannot subject hooked applicants to the element of randomness in the admissions process. Otherwise, they would lose important hooked applicants at too high a rate.</p>
<p>And while a music composer may be valued at Yale one year and valued at Dartmouth the next, I think it's safe to say that qualified URM's are valued at colleges, year after year. It probably upsets people that such an arbitrary distinction constitutes a "hook" at nearly every college in the country. As kb54010 so honestly put it,</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only difference is that this hook is inherent, while most hooks are earned.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think what it boils down to is that Ivy League colleges need a certain number of minorities. A certain number of kids are admitted that would not have been admitted without the race card, which isa given, because of the tiny number of very qualified minority students that does end up applying. Then, you have the entire group of very qualified minorities, which are admitted at a very, very high rate. So unhooked applicants who are very qualified feel wronged in two ways - once when random chance does not affect the "inherently hooked" URM applicants, and a second time when "less qualified" applicants are accepted.</p>
<p>And when I refer to "very well qualified" and "less qualified", I am alluding to the "edge of admission", as described in Chuck Hugh's book, What it Really Takes to Get into the Ivy League. According to this former senior admissions officer at Harvard college, there actually is a sort of cutoff for admission, and a sense of what is qualified and what is not qualified is developed in the admissions office. So I am not making judgments on anyone's qualifications in my post; I'm more stating that colleges do have implict cutoffs, as articulated in the "edge of admission" concept.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>Hey KP,
You are awesome. I think that you stated your position very well. However, I do not agree totally. As an African American female I believe that Affirmative Action is totally misguided in the present day. One, it only helps the MIDDLE CLASS!!!!! The policy of AA only helps you so far. After all, the critical mass of African Americans that scored above 1400 (of which I am proud to be apart of ) is largely middle class. I would argue that these people are not as adversely affected, as say a student who grows up in the ghetto, by the past injustices to thier race. Furthermore, often lower income students do not have the same opportunities as that of middle class students. They do not have access to the same opportunities as their middle class peers. Thus, they usually score lower on standardized tests and will often go to a school that simply does not prepare them for a college envirinment. This is a sad state of affairs, if you ask me, because the very people whom AA is supposed to help are simply passed over in the long run. Although, as my very existence can attest to, there are exceptions.</p>
<p>I believe in Affirmative Action in theory, but it often comes too late to help a lot of people. It kills me that many people are simply passed over. There is something going on with the state of American education, and, on a larger scale, society. There are more Black men in prison than in college. What does that mean? What does that say about our society?</p>
<p>Off your point about AA spurring divisiveness, I think that AA is just symptomatic of a larger problem in race relations in America. If it wasnt AA, it would be the the undrelying problem of inequity in education. I believe that we must see into the heart of this matter to really resolve it. We must understand that it is not just about AA, it's about something much larger, and until we realize that we will always come back to the same convoluted AA debate that some of the earlier posters tried to avoid. </p>
<p>BTW, kb54010. What school do you go to? I go to Whitney Young. Also, do u have a prom date??? Seriously. You sound awesome. I hope you get into Columbia because I think you would give me a run for my money if we ever got into a debate.</p>
<p>Peace,
Tiffany</p>
<p>Anxious, I believe he stated that he wasn't an applicant to Columbia.</p>
<p>kp, I really appreciate what you have said about AA because it gives me a new perspective on this issue, especially this paragraph:</p>
<p>"Is it fair, no, but neither is college admissions. Some people are born with musical ability, is it fair that that should be a factor. Some people are born with athletic ability, is it fair that they should stand a better chance of getting it. This is the real kicker: some people are born smarter than other people, is it fair that Ivies accept them more than other people. Nothing about this entire process is fair, which is why it is such a great experience for teenagers. I think it teaches a great lesson."</p>
<p>You have a very valid point here, except you're comparing ethnicity to other inherent factors such as musical or athletic talent. I believe you're saying that just as how musical/athletic/smart people are born with certain talents and those are taken into account at the college admissions level, it is the same as how we're also born with our ethnicity.</p>
<p>My only problem with that is although you can be born with musical talent, that doesn't say anything about you unless you DEVELOP it somehow, as in play an instrument and practice until you become better at it so it gives you a hook during admissions. I can have lots of musical talents, but if I have never touched a single instrument in my life, then it doesn't matter to college admissions. If you have athletic talent, that doesn't help you either unless you play a sport so colleges will notice. If you're smart, that doesn't matter either unless you put your "smartness" to work-- through rigorous classes, doing well on tests, etc. However, if you're born with a certain race... that doesn't need to be developed. It stays with you as it has always been, a person's race is obviously not developed over time.</p>
<p>Due to the above reasons, I think that's why some people have a problem with AA.</p>
<p>Like everybody and their mother, I agree with what kb said in-so-far as I believe it to be the truth. However, it's an ugly truth.</p>
<p>"Affirmative Action all comes down to supply and demand. The Ivy League and colleges in general have universally agreed that diversity is essential to a good college experience. [...]all the Ivies need qualified Blacks badly."</p>
<p>Ivies need qualified black students? What's intrinsically valuable about a black student? I mean, giving "unfair" preferential treatment to a musician or athlete makes sense because they contribute to the campus their unique skills. What does a black-student contribute? Blackness? The ability to make fun of black people without offending people? I appreciate black comedy as much as the next white guy, but I don't know how much relevancy it has to college.*</p>
<p>"In the end, what we have is a higher accept rate for Blacks than for the population at large.</p>
<p>Is it fair, no, but neither is college admissions."</p>
<p>Darn straight. Maybe it's not unfair for the reasons you listed, but it's certainly "unfair" in a myriad of other ways. C'est la vie. If a private organization wants to act in a way that's unfair, hey, it's thier product, and they certainly have no shortage of consumers.</p>
<p>*Tongue-in-cheek racial sarcasm not to be taken offensively, unless you're horribly sensitive.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Darn straight. Maybe it's not unfair for the reasons you listed, but it's certainly "unfair" in a myriad of other ways. C'est la vie. If a private organization wants to act in a way that's unfair, hey, it's thier product, and they certainly have no shortage of consumers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, even private colleges are not entirely free from federal regulations. Through their athletic programs, most colleges (even private ones) recieve some sort of federal financial assistance, which forces them to comply with certain federal guidelines or forfeit what they recieve. At least that's what happens, to the best of my understanding. </p>
<p>I believe private colleges have not been immune from certain suits to this end. But I may be incorrect.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>I know it's there, and I never complained. Things are the way they are. There is no use complaining.</p>
<p>bump
bump</p>
<p>kb54010, I agree wholeheartedly with you!</p>
<p>I am a male, african american high school junior. I took my SATs in december and scored 1450, but I plan to do better when I take the new SAT in may. I realise that this will be an excellent starting point for me if I wish to be admitted to top schools. It's true that the nation really is lacking in its numbers of truly academically excelling black students. I can't tell you how many advanced classes I've taken in high school where I was the only black student. I intend to apply to several Ivies, including Harvard (EA), Columbia, and Brown. You definitely have a point, but race isn't everything....</p>
<p>my cousin is female with lots of extracurriculars who studied abroad a year in Chile and scored a 1510 on her SATs, and she was not admitted to Princeton, her top choice. (Though I have qualms with Princeton and Yale... I got that ****ty postcard, too. By the way, she ended up going to Stanford)</p>
<p>By the way, Zach, regardless of whether or not you're being sarcastic, schools beneift a lot more from having a racially diverse student body than merely comedic relief. =P</p>