are colleges racist?

<p>MIT has 6% black students, while Caltech has 2%. That is suggestive.</p>

<p>

Here’s the problem–the only study I know of that looked directly at this question looked only at grades and scores (and we don’t know what the list of schools was–except not Princeton–and the data are old now). As has been repeated over and over above, the most selective schools in the US practice holistic admissions, and they turn down both white and Asian kids with extremely high grades and scores. If you look at the Harvard results thread here on CC, you’ll see a parade of waitlisted and rejected kids with fantastic qualifications. Again, remember that Harvard is admitting Asian kids at a rate three or four times the percentage of Asians in the population. So, while a disparity in scores raises questions, it is far from answering them. How many times do I have to say this? I know Asians think they are being discriminated against by these top schools, but where’s the proof? Why should these private schools change their procedures just because you are suspicious? They deny that they are doing what you think they are doing, and the federal investigation of Princeton for this hasn’t turned up anything so far.</p>

<p>I don’t agree with Hunt or Tigerdad – I think any race of the human race can do exceptionally well on the standardized tests in equal percentages. I completely disagree with any suggestion that there is anything whatsoever innate going on with the “gap.” I think that is a byproduct of the historic African American experience in our country and mostly lousy k-12 public education. Period.</p>

<p>I think erecting policies that correct for the gap just makes the gap persist. It is a figment of the American mind and nothing more and if we decide to reject it and move forward then we will.</p>

<p>My interest is the real time uncoached unedited writing sample is getting at the voice and perspective of the student and I do think the current method of selecting kids for these trophy schools is missing that. We’re talking about rich, ridiculously well endowed schools. I would really applaud them if they doubled, even tripled their admissions staff and asked for more writing and did more reading. Not to admit more black or URM kids. I don’t think those kids need that boost. But to get really interesting kids. And kids with a voice.</p>

<p>Life is so much about finding yourself having to think on your feet and find your voice and shape your thoughts and make them sing.</p>

<p>

I agree with this.

This I can’t agree with. This issue is figuring out what policies will work. Personally, I think that feeding URMs into the economy from highly selective schools at an artificially inflated rate will have a long-term beneficial effect, but certainly others disagree. But the gap is so large that I don’t see how we can just “move forward” and pretend that everything is fine.</p>

<p>Hunt, I respect your perspective and suspect it is more informed by research than my own. I just think AA policies are fundamentally patronizing. This comes a bit from my personal life and those who are dear to me.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Again, only Hunt is consistent here among racial preference supporters. Under his argument, I can easily see why we should have racial preferences, though of course I don’t agree.</p>

<p>Under others’ arguments, it is absolutely baffling to me why we should have them. Some appear to argue that the only reason why there’s a “UR” in “URM” is because not enough are in the applicant pool. If that’s the case, then there is ZERO need for racial preferences.</p>

<p>Others argue that there is no qualification gap among X categories between "URM"s and whites/Asians. To the extent that is true, it seems rather pointless to have racial preferences. You’re giving preference to "URM"s who are NO LESS LIKELY to get in and for what? Why are they deserving of the preference over the other candidates who are no more likely to get in? Maybe this was palatable back in the 1970s, but in this day and age, it is not. Otherwise, how could initiatives in California, Washington, Michigan, Nebraska, and Arizona have passed by such wide margins?</p>

<p>Only Hunt’s argument makes sense.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>If by “long-term beneficial effect” you mean creating a “URM” middle class, I don’t think racial preferences are effective at all. Precious few of the “URM” admits at elite institutions are “from the 'hood,” contrary to what Pizzagirl thinks. Most of them are actually from her socioeconomic class, so all you did was benefit the children of “URM” professionals: doctors, lawyers, engineers, and so forth.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Most voters are/were white, and most of them see eliminating affirmative action as in their own self-interest.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That explanation would make sense were it not for the following:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>California was the first to pass such an initiative (1996), and the “effects” have been known the longest.</p></li>
<li><p>Asians “benefited” the most from Proposition 209. White enrollment, if I’m not mistaken, actually declined at the UCs following Proposition 209. Feel free to correct me since I assume your user name is true.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>By the time voters in Michigan passed Proposal 2, Proposition 209 was a decade old. If they were really looking out for their own self-interest, they would’ve known that Proposal 2 wasn’t going to do it for them.</p>

<p>And a possibly minor or major point is that the man spearheading these initiatives, Ward Connerly, is black.</p>

<h1>2 occurred at the most selective UCs, but that was unlikely to be the intended effect for the voters in the voting booth. (Voters in California are more white than the general population, due to being older (more likely to vote), less likely to be immigrants who have not acquired citizenship, and less likely to be children too young to vote at all.)</h1>

<p>Overall, the effect was theoretically neutral considering the UC system as a whole, redistributing the students somewhat between more selective and less selective campuses, but not affecting who can get into UC (based on the hard GPA and test score minimums for UC eligibility).</p>

<p>However, actual enrollment in the UC system as a whole likely changed; a student who gets into a more selective UC like Berkeley or Los Angeles may choose it over a non-UC school, while a student who only gets into a less selective UC like Riverside or Santa Cruz may choose the non-UC school instead.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not finding concrete proofs in the Princeton case doesn’t mean discrimination doesn’t exist. Further efforts into more investigations should be done. US Asians are such a diverse group that it’s difficult to put forth a united effort for legal challenges. I agree with the notion that if you don’t like the system, do something.</p>

<p>“Not finding concrete proofs in the Princeton case doesn’t mean discrimination doesn’t exist.”</p>

<p>Well then what non-concrete proof was found. It all about asking to prove the invisible elephant is not in the room. Prove discrimination doesn’t exist, can now be the standard that proves Asians are discriminated in admissions. Agree this lack of proof calls for an investigated and legal action…lol Admissions must be hiding the discrimination with their high admission rate for Asian students.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This book, which seems to address this, seems kind of interesting - [Amazon.com:</a> Black American Students in An Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement (Sociocultural, Political, and Historical Studies in Education) (9780805845167): John U. Ogbu, With the Assist Davis: Books](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>2 thumbs up
(+ 10 characters = Grand Conspiracy :D)</p>

<p>How do you prove an attitude? How do prove that the admitted number of Asians are not purposely kept low, but above their overall general population representation?</p>

<p>How do you explain the gap between the % of Jews in the Ivies vs. Asians?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Right…with Harvard and Penn exceeding 30% Jewish representation. Oops.
What exactly is “American values” with US changing demographics?</p>

<p>I wonder how many Asians would get in if they decline to report…</p>

<p>Re. posts 768 and 770:</p>

<p>My STEM kid (the “URM” with 7 college physics class, 8 college math classes doing graduate level physics research this summer along with playing travel ball, working as a math tutor, playing his violin all over the place for money and service, and studying AP chem) <em>loves</em> writing! He would be happy to write a live college essay if he could have 3-4 hours or even 1-2 hours. His honors homeschooling literature class had in class essays about once a month and he learned to write very well. He keeps a blog and is writing a word book that he hopes to have published.</p>

<p>I have so many thoughts on the original topic and subsequent posts. I was just talking with a baseball dad from our 'hood whose son just finished his first year at UCLA. (He’s white) We agreed that his son is an inspiration to kids on our area who mostly go to the local CC or occasionally the local state uni. This kid’s the only one that I’ve heard do anything different. Another top baseball player, black, with educated parents, was looked at by Dartmouth, but apparently his grades and scores weren’t good enough and he’s at the CC this year. It’s a shame to me. My son will hopefully be another kid who can inspire others. Our community is very mixed racially and what holds kids back is such a complex mixture of race, income, location, frame of mind, etc. I can’t explain it. We’re not in a ghetto; we’re in a typically middle and lower middle class neighborhood but the mindset is discouraging. The ball player who got a look from Darthmouth moved from an even more lower socio-economic neighborhood into our neighborhood about 8 years ago. His parents are very into education. His father worked at a private university. They are very into civil rights and have talked a lot about the racism they experienced growing up in the south. Still, even with the move and their high expectations, for whatever reason, this son still didn’t do well enough in school to get recruited. The older daughters went to state schools away from home but from what I know of the family, all the kids were very intelligent and should have gone to “better” schools. What is it that causes kids in our neighborhood to not excel?</p>

<p>Contrast that to the friends my son has at math circle. Most are white, Indian, Chinese, Korean, and I think my son’s the only ethnic minority there. We’ve been to their houses. We know what kind of income most of the families have. We know how incredibly involved the families are in the math circle. My son said he’s the only one that has his license and drives himself! The rest are brought there by their parents. My son and I were discussing the fact that his other close Asian friend whose not in math circle has found a balance. He goes to a very good public school; his family has money but he’s not just interested in math and science despite his parents desiring him to be involved in math and science competitions. He likes humanities, too, and he’s a leader at his school and he’s been involved in two sports. He’s been able to strike a balance and I guess his parents have reluctantly allowed that and we both agree it‘s a really good thing. This is a young man I think that will do very well in college admissions this coming year. </p>

<p>We also know that college admissions were tough for kids at the math circle, both white and Asian. I don’t know stats this year other than one Asian got into UCB but apparently, no other top school, and was very upset. Another young man (White) is going to Caltech but apparently, didn’t get into other top schools. His accomplishments, which are very impressive, seem to be limited to math and physics. Last year, one of the top kids (white) got into Princeton but his accomplishments went well beyond math and science.</p>

<p>But here’s a thought. My son’s closest friend at the math circle is Asian. He and my son were both interviewed by the local paper for a certain accomplishment. He and his friend are about 10 months apart and have very similar accomplishments in science and math. His friend made USJMO this year (my son didn’t make it in his first and only attempt last year). My son’s SAT score is higher right now but I have no doubt his friend will retake and get higher while my son is satisfied with his 2320. His friend goes to one of the best private school and lives in a very nice house and neighborhood and he’s a very nice young man.</p>

<p>In reading the interviews, I was struck by something and perhaps this might give some insight into selective admissions. When comparing my son’s interview with the other young man, I was struck by the singularity of his focus, working one on one with his teacher and focused on this area for the future.</p>

<p>While my son talked about his love for the topic, he also shared that he plays Bob Dylan songs, he’s a math tutor and violin teacher, he emphasized his love of writing, his many years as a baseball player, and his desire to combine his love of math and science with his creativity.</p>

<p>Maybe (just maybe, I’m saying) some schools look at the overall picture and look for a broader interest base. Maybe it’s possible that schools look at the profiles of the students who are ultimately rejected and decide they’re looking for a different profile. Maybe they decide that a 2400 SAT, etc. isn’t the only criteria for what makes a successful student that will enrich their campus.</p>

<p>I’m still left with the discomfort of AA/reverse discrimination. It doesn’t seem fair. However, just because it exists doesn’t mean that all Asians with great test scores should automatically be admitted over others with slightly lower scores.</p>

<p>The second issue is one I have no answer for. What do we do about the mentality of neighborhoods such as ours? I’m not in favor of achievement of achievement’s sake. My oldest son loves to learn and has followed his interests, sometimes to the detriment of a higher test score or math competition score. He is ok with that. I wrestle with that but I let him decide how much time he’ll put into his studies (this is counter cultural to many in the Asian community as he knows; we have discussed this issue at length and our whole family had lengthy discussions about the Tigermom which has some appeal but my son said he’d run away if I parented like that). OTOH, why are the families not raising the bar on their goal setting and achievements? What is it that keeps families from bettering themselves, furthering themselves, and reaching for the stars, so to speak? How can we-our family, my son, our community, our country spur on families to break from the cycle of mediocrity? I really don’t have an answer but perhaps AA wouldn’t be needed if we found a way to address this kind of question and come up with a solution…but I fear it’s too deeply complex for a solution. (Though Ted Dalrymple tries to address one facet of the problem in his book <em>Life at the Bottom</em>. I highly recommend it.)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You misunderstood my post. The key word is “finding”.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Now that is a very interesting definition of ethnic minority.</p>

<p>It is important to remember that “proof” is also a slippery slope. If I believe in something, no proof is necessary; if I don’t believe in something, no amount of proof is sufficient. </p>

<p>My position on this topic is well known, and thus far I see no need to modify it.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No school in between Dartmouth and the (open admission?) community college in terms of selectivity? Or was he accepted at some but did not go because of other (financial?) reasons?</p>