<p>I know that colleges want to diversify their student bodies...</p>
<p>However, does that mean that adcoms look at upper-class URMs the same way they look at lower-class URMs?</p>
<p>Thanks! :)</p>
<p>No. Seeing that Harvard has adopted a hollistic view to their application, a low income URM w/ scores comparable to their richer counterpart will have their accomplishments viewed in a different light because of the lack of resources avaliable. But even with that added incentive, comparatively there are less low income high schieving students.</p>
<p>So do colleges want to diversify their student bodies in terms of their ethnicities or their socioeconomic classes?</p>
<p>They want to achieve both but most of the time, the latter is hard to come by because of the lack of communication/awareness/ support/ that many high achieving students from modest backgrounds receive from their high school and admission offices. This dillema has proctored a change in many elite universities and was also the main factor in the creation of the HFAI ( Harvard Financial Aid Initiative), an amazing program.</p>
<p>Aww, I wish I was poor and underrepresented, darn it! :(</p>
<p>I really don't think you do =) !</p>
<p>But all I need to do is be poor and a minority for 18 years and it's Harvard baby, here i come!</p>
<p>I don't think socioeconomic status affects the admissions process...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Aww, I wish I was poor and underrepresented, darn it!
[/quote]
You honestly have no idea what you just said right now, even if that was sarcastic.</p>
<p>I wasn't being sarcastic...</p>
<p>^
Umm...Okay...</p>
<p>Alright, serious question pertaining to the topic of AA: How do adcoms view upper-class nonURMs (probably incorrectly phrased) versus upper-class URMs? Is there a distinction just because of race despite both being upper-class?</p>
<p>"Aww, I wish I was poor and underrepresented, darn it! "</p>
<p>"African American men in some poor urban areas face lower probabilities of survival to age 45 than white men nationwide face to age 65. In these urban areas two-thirds of 15 year old males cannot expect to survive to age 65.This represents less than half the probability of survival to age 65 of white males"</p>
<p>Agent of Sense your ignorance profounds me, it truly does. Whether you were being sarcastic or not you shouldn't say stuff like what you previously posted.</p>
<p>Only recently, and only among the richest schools, is there a distinction b/w rich and poor.</p>
<p>"Agent of Sense your ignorance profounds me, it truly does. Whether you were being sarcastic or not you shouldn't say stuff like what you previously posted."</p>
<p>I never thought my sarcasm would be questioned. I assumed it was obvious, especially with your response to my first statement. I was only trying to satirize the belief of the unfairness of affirmative action. Get a grip.</p>
<p>You did say you weren't being sarcastic (with an ellipse, so it seemed sincere)...</p>
<p>It was a pretty asinine thing to say, joking or not--"I wish I had to go through hell for most of my life so that I could get a leg up in admissions."</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't think socioeconomic status affects the admissions process...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It does. Consider this:</p>
<p>
[quote]
According to a 2004 study by the Century Foundation, a New York-based research group, at the 146 most selective colleges in the U.S., just 3% of the students came from families that ranked in the bottom 25% in income, while 74% came from the top 25%.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's why organizations like QuestBridge exist: to help low-income students out. The dean of admissions at Amherst, Tom Parker, said:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The moment you are identified as a QuestBridge applicant, you are prioritized in a way that very few applicants are. When you're a QuestBridge student, you're in a priority bin. They've got a leg up in a way that perhaps an athlete or legacy would have a way up.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Harvard, as well as many other schools, is looking to diversify its student body socioeconomically.</p>
<p>By the way, if you're curious about QuestBridge, look in the admissions forum--there's a thread for this year going, though it keeps getting buried, so go back a few pages until you find it. Also, check out the old QuestBridge thread in the financial aid forum. You can also PM me or check out its site:</p>
<p>QuestBridge</a> Home Page</p>
<p>In answer to the OP, I would say that Harvard views a rich URM and a poor URM differently. Why? Because there's usually less adversity there. One reason that URMs often get a leg-up in admissions is that they are more likely to have had to experience adversity due to socioeconomics. Without that, the "effectiveness" in admissions of being a URM is much lower. I've seen many URMs rejected from HYPS--and very often, it's because they were in higher income brackets (100k-150k, 150k-200k, 200k+, etc.).</p>
<p>Well, after someone wrote, "You honestly have no idea what you just said right now, even if that was sarcastic," I wrote that I wasn't being sarcastic because, ironically, I was. I'll make sure to write a sarcasm disclaimer every time I type something. </p>
<p>(SARCASM)</p>
<p>"It was a pretty asinine thing to say, joking or not--"I wish I had to go through hell for most of my life so that I could get a leg up in admissions."</p>
<p>That was the point of my statement as a response to all the affirmative action hate rampant on CC.</p>
<p>Whatever you say...</p>
<p>Seriously dude....wow.</p>