<p>@collegebound- I’m not snapping at you; today is a good day for me. I think you’re a tad bit too sensitive or extremely heated at this thread. Ummm…Oh I was talking to monstor about sports involvement, but I did mention getting recruited b/c a lot of kids esp. from my school get recruited off of sports and they take the easiest classes (we only need 20 credits to graduate at our school). </p>
<p>What do you mean stats? I’m black, I’m a female, and I live in Arizona. What more do you need to know? </p>
<p>Oh the stats about AA. I said go to the African-American section. There are no stats needed. If URMs face being told that they got in SOLELY on AA, and they report what they’re being told on CC, then it’s common sense that a lot of people really believe that URMs aren’t as qualified as ORMs which isn’t always the case. Like I said, I’ve even experienced it, and that’s real life. You can’t put a stat on something you experience unless you wanna record each and every incident.</p>
<p>lol 20 credits=4 classes at my school. i meant stats like sat but w.e</p>
<p>^^^ Psshhh…it’s 2 classes for kids senior year, and the guy got into Caltech. He’s going to Caltech off of baseball and only got 20 credits. All the IB kids take 7 classes…we could graduate by 1st semester of junior year if we really wanted to. I haven’t gotten my SAT scores back yet. I’m taking the ACT tomorrow. lol. lo siento</p>
<p>Theos Rizos,</p>
<p>I am confused. What do you think the fact that your brother got admitted to 8 of the 13 colleges he applied to proves? He did not claim to be an URM, I am guessing from what you say he is a pretty good student, so??? Is this is supposed to prove that Affirmative Action does not confer a significant advantage on those who claim it, I fail to see how it accomplishes that. Can you explain?</p>
<p>Collegebound,</p>
<p>What makes you think that Harvard does not practice AA?</p>
<p>So are those of you who are arguing that AA does not confer an advantage in admissions to URM’s prepared to move to race blind admissions. If not, why not?</p>
<p>^^^the thread that some1 posted. It was harvard. They dont need AA because they probably have the most qualified pool and and pick and choose ANY1. Who would turn down harvard unless they have a dream to go somewhere else?</p>
<p>hey, everyone. i love this thread and all the unique points made on it. i believe having a discussion about AA helps everyone benefit and understand themselves and the policy more. However, I have to mediate this and say somethings.
- Do not get angry at each other- it is pointless . this is a discussiobn
- Don’t ask each other to post stats we are not in a boxing match- we are sounding off and examing every details of AA extensively</p>
<p>O.k. Keep the thread going. Love you. and I love following it.</p>
<p>I second the poster above me. Personally, I believe that AA is no “myth”. Most would agree with me. Some are claiming that URMs got in based SOLELY on their qualifications, and while there are many highly qualified URMs, this simply isn’t true. I think we’ve all heard anecdotal evidence along the lines of, “This girl is an outstanding leader at my school, with a great GPA and impressive test scores. Her ECs are amazing as well. Everyone thought she was going to get into the top-tier schools that she wanted to attend. However, a less-qualified URM got in over her”.
I have many qualms with AA, most of which have been mentioned already.
- AA can cause highly qualified URMs to be stereotyped as “getting in because he/she was (fill in minority here)”. Thus AA undermines the achievements of URMs who 100% deserved their positions. This must be very frustrating for them
- AA should not be applied to affluent URMs who have the same opportunities as the Whites and Asians who are disadvantaged by AA. Unfortunately, at my prep school I’ve witnessed wealthy URMs with sub-par qualifications gaining acceptances over better-qualified applicants.
- AA ignores the fact that URMs are not the only people who’ve had “less opportunities”. What about low-income whites and Asians who grew up in poor school districts? Shouldn’t they be considered to be as disadvantaged as URMs growing up in bad areas?
- Asians have a HUGE disadvantage in the application process. AA is not the only cause of this, but it certainly is a factor. I’ve heard too much of this: “Dude I’m sorry, but your chances are very very slim. Your grades and scores are as good as they get, but you do typical Asian activities related to math, science, and music. Tough luck unless you’re the best scientist on the whole planet”.
It’s worth admitting that AA is responsible for some serious flaws in college admissions. However, we must also acknowledge how flawed admissions are in other aspects (i.e. students with wealthy alumni donors in their family). The fact “life isn’t fair” is one that has been proven too many times in the college process.</p>
<p>Ehh…this is a highly controversial topic and I’ve already stated my beliefs and I have respect for all educated opinions stated on this thread.</p>
<p>I would like to agree with Massgirl with this particular statement she made above
"
2) AA should not be applied to affluent URMs who have the same opportunities as the Whites and Asians who are disadvantaged by AA. Unfortunately, at my prep school I’ve witnessed wealthy URMs with sub-par qualifications gaining acceptances over better-qualified applicants. "</p>
<p>Nicely said! Ethnicity shouldn’t be a factor judged, and I’m sure many colleges don’t take that into consideration. I still believed AA is over hyped, however, I agree to some extent. I mainly believe that economic status, and social status should be two big factors. There’s definitely something to be said by people who overcome scenarios where they are homeless, and graduate at the top of their class. I know quite a few people like this.;)</p>
<p>~ Theos</p>
<p>Collegebound41- "I looked at your thread where you said “^^^ theres no way an orm would have gotten into wharton with a 640 in math II and no 5s on AP tests”</p>
<p>-You cannot contribute that person’s admittance due to what you consider the “Hook” of being a URM. She was a first generation student, took MANY AP classes, ranked 8/433 which is in the top 1% of their class, president of their school’s national honor society, played varsity sports, work experience, and was an overall competitive applicant.</p>
<p>Just because her math SAT II was a 640 Math II she wasn’t competitive? It’s just a test… I think you need to relook her stats on that thread. She deserved to get into Wharton purely because of her own merits of being an awesome applicant. ;)</p>
<p>~ Theos</p>
<p>“ranked 8/433 which is in the top 1% of their class,”</p>
<p>That’s top 2%. Nice math.</p>
<p>^^ do you realize that probably all of the applicants have at least one of those qualities? Work, nhs, and MANY Ap classes are pretty common for penn. </p>
<ol>
<li>most people take MANY ap classes and get 5s. She also didnt take every test for each corresponding class, which you can question why?</li>
<li>first generation is somehow another hook</li>
<li>i would make a bet than over 90% of people in wharton got above a 700 on math II(just look at the rd and ed section for penn)</li>
</ol>