<p>It has been informative exchanging view points with you. I will be off this thread for a while and unable to repond to any future posts. Good luck to all of you.</p>
<p>Its funny to see ya'll debating about AA, when I really don't think that is the case any more at the elite colleges. They want to create diverse classes, period. With or without AA, if that's what they want to do they will do it. HYPS value diversity, no matter how much you may not like it.</p>
<p>If youre tired of having URM's with you at elite colleges, then don't apply. They don't want people like you who obviously believe you deserve a golden spot at their college and whine like babies at anything that looks like a barrier. One day, maybe you can create your own colleges and admit only people you want.</p>
<p>What colleges dont want are whiners. "OMG, my parents make less than 10,000 dolllars. OMG im so poor and i work so hard, but colleges dont value me because im asian" </p>
<p>Whining isnt going to make adcoms like you. Be optimistic despite your circumstances, I sure am.</p>
<p>Its funny because most people here on CC honestly believe that HYPS, and others should accept only those with the highest stats, without considering anything else.</p>
<p>LOL, its funny to see these same people studying day and night for the SAT's like its the be-all factor in admissions and then getting rejected in April,wondering what went wrong.</p>
<p>As a graduate of an elite Ivy, I do admissions interviews, as do many grads. It is very clear that many of the rich, white suburban kids have been tutored to within an inch of their lives for school subjects, SATs, etc. They have private college coaches because they don't have the self-confidence to write their own essays, and it goes on and on. In my area, most (not all) of the URMs are from much less wealthy neighborhoods, they have rarely taken the SAT more than once, they all work after school or often have parents working 2 jobs so they take care of the younger kids. Many go to libraries to use the computer and internet, since they don't have them at home.
You can't compare these students based on their test scores and grades. Also, remember that colleges want "interesting" students who have done something - whether risen from bad circumstances or used their fortunate circumstances to do something other than just be a grind so they could say they went to X college. Yes, everyone wants the brilliant students - the ones who got published in the New Yorker at age 15 (who cares if that kid is good at math), or the one who has made scientific contributions already, or even scored straight 800s on all tests the first time. But while good, hard working students will always form the backbone of the admitted students, we all know that lots of kids who get good grades and high scores are "made" and not "born".
Yes, schools do want URMs, for diversity on campus and to make their schools more interesting places. But don't get upset - schools are already starting to give "tips" to males, including white males, since so many more women are in college. Is that fair? Do you all think it's a good idea for there to be some gender balance at schools or would you like them to be way more female since typcally the women apply with better grades?</p>
<p>Look, DiamondT, what colleges don't want is people who can't think for themselves and just go with the flow. If I don't think something is right, I'm not going to sit back and watch it happen. I don't expect "whining" at CC to change AA; I want other people's opinions about it. If you have no particular opinion about AA, which is obviously the case, don't waste your precious time at Phillips Exeter posting on this thread.</p>
<p>I believe the main argument against AA is not about poor urms but about rich urms. Should a rich URM get an advantage in the college admissions procedure simply because of his color? What did the rich URM do that gained him this advantage? What's the point of having a diverse campus if it is built on false pretense. Again, please note that I am specifically referring to middle to upper class urms.</p>
<p>foodisgood...just out of curiosity, why do you assume that colleges treat all urms alike? one of the reasons that colleges ask about your parents -- their education and employment -- is to give the applicant's credentials some perspective. i've never seen anything to suggest that this doesn't apply to ALL applicants.</p>
<p>nycdad, it seems that quite a few of the previous posters have said that AA is based on the need for diversity and is not based on financial/socioeconomoic reasons. And while parent's education and employment may be taken into concern, I don't believe that this amendment is strictly adhered to. May I quote one of your earlier posts:</p>
<p>
[quote]
"gee...and all this time, I thought that's what financial aid was for.</p>
<p>affirmative action was developed to address the FACT that certain groups were being discriminated against. And, as it turns out, these groups were racial, not financial. It remains the case, today, even with affirmative action, that certain groups are still under represented. When that is no longer the case, affirmative action will, in all liklihood, disappear along with the problem that it helped eliminate.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You said yourself that affirmative action was developed because the groups being discriminated against were racial, not financial. So you are bascially saying that the financial aspect of it is being ignored and that is okay?</p>
<p>foodisgood...
first of all, i said no such thing. a lot of time has passed since aa was conceived and today's situation.</p>
<p>and second, you didn't answer my question: i've read the thread and i know what people here are saying. but saying it doesn't make it so. i'm asking you why you assume that it's true: that all urms are treated alike.</p>
<p>i am attaching a link to an article in the Williams Alumni Review - Recipie For Success. It is about how the admission committee at Williams tires to balance the scores of priorities from the campus
community. (they admit that the process is not purely based on numbers). Their process is really no different than that of their peer as elite colleges who are trying to craft a community of learners.</p>
<p>I believe that the article addresses some of the misconceptions that students have about the admissions process in general however they find it easier to use AA as the stick they use to beat the process with.</p>
<p>foodisgood,</p>
<p>regrading financial diversity:</p>
<p>
[quote]
As the numbers have risen, so too has the intensity of the Colleges efforts to ensure, as Schapiro (president of the college) says, that Williams has the best students in the world, regardless of their family circumstances. Despite this long-standing commitment, research (much of it conducted by the Williams Project on the Economics of Higher Education) has shown that highly qualified
students from low-income backgrounds are underrepresented among the most selective colleges and universities. As a result, according to a 2004 study, 74 percent of students attending
the nations top colleges and universities come from families in the top income quintile (earning more than about $92,000 annually),while 9 percent come from the bottom two quintiles (typically earning less than $40,000 per year).</p>
<p>So Williams has taken several steps this decade to make its student body more socioeconomically diverse. In addition to extending its need-blind admission policy to international students and expanding financial aid to meet 100 percent of all families demonstrated need, the College is recruiting in more cities and schools that serve low income
students. This past year, Williams also joined Questbridge, a nonprofit initiative that matches colleges with highly talented underprivileged students. (Stanford and Princeton have both recently joined Questbridge) Though this thrust produces many benefits for the Collegeproviding exceptional students the opportunity to learn from each others experiences and backgroundsit has another undeniable effect: intensifying the already stiff competition for admission slots.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>the article goes on to state:</p>
<p>The admission office has paid extra attention in the last few years to its socio-ec tags, which identify students who hail from an obvious modest/low-income background or whose parents did not attend college. This is the only way that a students financial situation is discussed by the admission office, as Williams is one of only a few dozen colleges in the country that ensures applicants will be admitted without regard to whether they can afford to pay for college.</p>
<p>I must thank Interesteddad, from the parent's forum for this next peice of information: (this came as part of a discussion on A is for admission)
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=102808&page=3%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=102808&page=3</a></p>
<p>A Williams Econ major, with Pres. Morty Schapiro recently wrote her senior thesis on socio-economic factors in admissions at Williams. Taylor E. Lindsey, "Low-income students and college admissions: a case study of Williams College", available here:</p>
<p>She studied data from the incoming enrolled classes of 2000, 2001, and 2002 -- the entering freshmen of Fall 96-98. Admissions gave her all of the relevent breakdowns, except racial/ethnic data.</p>
<p>Fascinating insight into admissions at an elite liberal arts college. For that three year period, the breakdown of actual enrolled freshmen on the academic index scale was:</p>
<p>Academic 1: 15.3% (pretty much auto admit)
Academic 2: 27.1%
Academic 3: 15.7%
Academic 4: 13.1%
Academic 5: 10.6%
Academic 6: 11.3%
Academic 7: 10.7%
Academic 8: 0.1%
Unknown: 2.1%</p>
<p>Flags were applied by admissions office for notable EC strength. The flag is for varsity sports participation in high school, participation in the arts, community service, and so and so forth. This is not the same as athletic department designation and includes more than hard-core athletic department or music department recruits.</p>
<p>Some of those percentages:</p>
<p>Varsity Sports flag: 72.8% (male), 57.1% (female)</p>
<p>Varsity Football flag: 13.4% of male freshmen</p>
<p>Legacy flag (parent and/or grandparent): 13.7%</p>
<p>Overall Arts flags: 25.7%</p>
<p>Specific arts flags included in above:
Dance, 2.0%, Music 17.4%, Theater 1.7%, Writer 1.8%, Studio Arts 2.6%</p>
<p>Community Service flag: 10.0%</p>
<p>Student government flag: 7.7%</p>
<p>Political involvment flag: 2%</p>