are colleges racist?

[Pizzagirl]

<p>Moreover, the commentary is often accompanied by "But so-and-so (at my high school, in my town, that I know somehow) got in and he / she only had scores of … ". As if - despite repeated evidence to the contrary - higher scores made one “better” or more worthy of admittance to elite colleges. It’s so tiresome to read kids who are supposedly smart enough to get 2400’s and the like not be able to grasp this simple fact.</p>

[mommusic]

<p>^ Anecdotal, but this ties in with reports (on the radio) that the Chinese may be raising a generation of test-takers who are not creative, innovative, or interested in anything but test scores. It’s a product of their system for getting into a college.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

You might not have noticed, but all lily-white WASP establishments aren’t cool anymore like they were in the 1950’s. Isn’t that a good thing, not a bad thing?

</p>

<p>What makes you think that’s what would happen if the elites abandoned racial preferences?</p>

<p>

Region of the country. Interests (classics majors, engineering majors). Religious beliefs. Socioeconomic status. College “relevance” (first-gens, legacies). Private schools, public schools. Hobbies / interests / extracurriculars.

</p>

<p>And focusing on these is insufficient to produce “diversity”? Because if they’re sufficient, then there is no need for racial preferences, is there?</p>

[epiphany]

<p>

As if - despite repeated evidence to the contrary - higher scores made one “better” or more worthy of admittance to elite colleges. It’s so tiresome to read kids who are supposedly smart enough to get 2400’s and the like not be able to grasp this simple fact.

</p>

<p>Agreed. There are all kinds of “smarts,” as you well have mentioned, PG, in previous posts. One aspect of such smarts (perhaps something you haven’t mentioned) is the aspect of curiosity & initiative. And I have the same reaction to such lack of curiosity by students of any personal origins; perhaps I even expect more of students with no immigrant origins for the last several generations here. If you were applying for a job (and college will be your job for 4 years), would you also exert so little effort in trying to figure out, not what you assume or expect or “have heard,” or what your parents tell you, or what peers at school tell you, but what the colleges are looking for? If the application were for a job, not a college, would you think all you had to do was present credentials and be done with it? No, you would, if you expected to be viewed as a viable candidate, do some research about what your employer or place of employment was looking for: what he, she, and the company valued. And you would either align yourself with such expectations, via preparation (what you did with yourself prior to application, such as training, expertise, such as the kind of resume you write), or you would funnel your job applications to the employers most likely to favor what you do have, and what you personally value, because there will be the match.</p>

<p>(What a concept!) :rolleyes:</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

So if I said: “On average, blacks are not as qualified as Hispanics and Asians to compete at high academic levels. Therefore, it makes sense to have racial preferences so they are still present on elite campuses” – you’d say, “Yes, agreed” and we’d shake hands and be done?

</p>

<p>Let me pre-empt your trap by pointing out, once again, that I do not believe in SAT supremacy.</p>

<p>If you said,</p>

<p>“On average, blacks are not as qualified as whites and Asians across multiple objective criteria. Therefore, it makes sense to have racial preferences so they are still present on elite campuses with ‘adequate representation.’”</p>

<p>I would say, “Yes, agreed.” We’d shake hands and be done.</p>

[fireandrain]

<p>

"URM"s who get into the Ivies are more likely to be those who went to a “BS with $40K tuition, $70K tutoring cost, and a 2330 on the SAT” than those who went to an “inner-city public school, works 20 hours a week to help the family, and gets only 1950 on the SAT.”

</p>

<p>Proof, please? Anecdotal evidence doesn’t count.</p>

<p>

Acceptance rate relative to application numbers of each group is not known. I’m sure some will see this, also, as an orchestrated conspiracy, but when colleges get 12,000+ applications for a single year, they are not going to spend the precious time needed to review the best of those, cataloguing personal origin data of 12K students. It’s not going to happen.

</p>

<p>I am aware that these statistics don’t exist. Which is why I don’t understand why people insist as if it is a true fact that Asians have a lower acceptance rate. There are thousands of Asians at the Ivies + MIT + Stanford. Many are obviously getting in. Many are being rejected – but many whites, blacks, Hispanics and Jews are being rejected, too. Other than anecdotal evidence (“at my HS”), is there any hard data that proves that the acceptance rate for Asians is lower? Without that evidence, we can talk in circles for years.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

Region of the country. Interests (classics majors, engineering majors). Religious beliefs. Socioeconomic status. College “relevance” (first-gens, legacies). Private schools, public schools. Hobbies / interests / extracurriculars. </p>

<p>And focusing on these is insufficient to produce “diversity”? Because if they’re sufficient, then there is no need for racial preferences, is there?

</p>

<p>Well, yes, obviously colleges feel that focusing on these is insufficient to produce diversity and desire to add race as one of those things considered. However, the intent is to use it positively, to be more inclusive to more different groups of people – which is what makes it exactly opposite from the Jewish-1930’s examples. Can’t help it if you choose to view it negatively.</p>

[TatinG]

<p>Higher scores combined with high GPA’s do equate to success in graduating from college. As I said in an earlier post, AA students have a higher rate of failing college than non-AA students. After all, what good is it to admit students who are unable to do the work, only to have them drop out/fail out? </p>

<p>If SAT/ACT scores shouldn’t matter then why not go to a pass/fail testing system? Set a score floor. Students either pass or fail. Like the bar exam.</p>

[epiphany]

<p>

I am aware that these statistics don’t exist. Which is why I don’t understand why people insist as if it is a true fact that Asians have a lower acceptance rate. There are thousands of Asians at the Ivies + MIT + Stanford. Many are obviously getting in. Many are being rejected – but many whites, blacks, Hispanics and Jews are being rejected, too. Other than anecdotal evidence (“at my HS”), is there any hard data that proves that the acceptance rate for Asians is lower? Without that evidence, we can talk in circles for years.

</p>

<p>You’ll get no argument from me, fireandrain. I’ve pointed out that no data is presented on these threads about rejections of other categories of applicants, when clearly whites are rejected by the thousands and other minority groups are also rejected despite strong applications of many of them. In fact there is some evidence (data, not anecdotal) that Asians are actually advantaged in college admissions results, relative to applications of all groups combined. I don’t have that data handy, but I can probably find it.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

If SAT/ACT scores shouldn’t matter then why not go to a pass/fail testing system? Set a score floor. Students either pass or fail. Like the bar exam.

</p>

<p>How does that help the adcom choosing amongst 30,000 students, the vast majority of who are “qualified” in the sense that they could academically do the work?</p>

[epiphany]

<p>fireandrain,
Here’s one example, posted on cc by siserune in April of this year. I will post above his, the prompt for that reply:</p>

<p>

Quote:
Originally Posted by toughyear
The affirmative action suppresses asian american admissions.
Just look at the Yale number (Fall 2009) … 69% white, 14% asian american, 9% african american, 8% Hispanic … I wouldn’t be surprised if the proportion of applicants is more than double the proportion of this incoming class for asian americans.

</p>

<p>Originally posted by siserune

Last year’s numbers for MIT were provided by an admissions officer, and showed Asians being admitted at a rate higher than their proportion in the applicant pool. Asians accounted for 26 percent of applicants… and 30 percent of acceptances. For comparison, something like 19 percent of applicants were black/Hispanic and this accounted for 24 percent of acceptances. Apparently whites, not Asians, had the lowest rate of admission relative to number of applications.

</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/9899004-post8.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/9899004-post8.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I will note with amusement the reflexive reply right underneath that, by a poster called beatlesdisturbed:

^But in all reality, Asians tend to be the most qualified candidates.

</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>"I have no idea what type of “rigging” you’re referring to (different schema). Could you please elaborate? "</p>

<p>I’m talking about blacks and certain Hipanics being admitted to jail/juvenille hall at a higher rate than other groups, in spite of having the same “qualifications” for incarceration. </p>

<p>Specific examples around here include white kids going to a psych hospital with a diagnosis of “bipolar disorder”, and black and Mexican kids exhibiting exactly the same behaviors and go to juvenille hall.</p>

<p>For the record, I didn’t bring up the jail thing, and yes I know some would say that doesn’t have anything to do with college admissions.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

Proof, please? Anecdotal evidence doesn’t count.

</p>

<p>Very fair question. Go to college-insight.org.</p>

<p>You’ll find that for Harvard, in academic years 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09, 478, 496, and 441 dependent students with family incomes below $30,000 applied for aid. Let’s assume that all of them are "URM"s.</p>

<p>If you define “URM” to be Native American, black, and Hispanic, in those years there were 1838, 1950, and 1993 "URM"s. Simple division shows that the ratios range from ~22% to ~26%.</p>

<p>So even if all of the aid applicants from families with incomes <$30,000/year were “URM”, most of the "URM"s come from families with incomes higher than that. Given how unlikely it is that ALL of the aid applicants in that bracket were "URM"s, my percentages are underestimates.</p>

<p>Ah, but perhaps $30,000 is too low. How about $59,999? Well, in that case, it is possible that all of the "URM"s at HYP are from families that make less than $59,999/year because there are more aid applicants in that bracket than there are "URM"s.</p>

<p>Possible? Yes. Likely? No. Consider that peer school Duke [url=<a href=“http://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-draws-rich-kids-all-colors]reported[/url”>Duke draws ‘rich kids of all colors’ - The Chronicle]reported[/url</a>] that in 2006, black students came from families with average incomes of $118,316 > $59,999.</p>

<p>The only thing I can say for certainty is that most of the "URM"s at HYP in those years came from families that earned more than $30,000/year. I admit that that isn’t strong enough to justify my claim.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

Possible? Yes. Likely? No. Consider that peer school Duke reported that in 2006, black students came from families with average incomes of $118,316 > $59,999.

</p>

<p>I would treat averages very skeptically. If you had one or two super-wealthy black families who sent their children to Duke, the average income could be pulled up quite substantially. This would rather be like asking about the average income of the Jewish kids at Duke (during the time Ralph Lauren sent his children there) and including Ralph Lauren’s income in the calculation. I would look for more of a mode or median, personally.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

If you had one or two super-wealthy black families who sent their children to Duke, the average income could be pulled up quite substantially. This would rather be like asking about the average income of the Jewish kids at Duke (during the time Ralph Lauren sent his children there) and including Ralph Lauren’s income in the calculation. I would look for more of a mode or median, personally.

</p>

<p>Point taken. I do not believe College Insight has the mode or median information available (or even the mean).</p>

<p>But it’s natural to ask, who would the “super-wealthy black families” have been at Duke in 2006 that could have caused the average to be misleading? If you assume that without family X in the statistic the mean would’ve been much less than $118,316, said family X must have a tremendously large income, so large that we should know who family X is.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>The son of a <em>huge</em> movie celebrity (probably one of the biggest movie stars around these days) attends S’s school. I am quite sure his salary brings up any average!</p>

<p>But I also know there are plenty of people with seven-figure incomes who aren’t necessarily “celebrity” families that everyone would be aware of. They might just be “the doctor,” “the lawyer,” “the small business owner,” etc. People might figure out that they are reasonably upper middle class, but not have a clue that they are as well-to-do as they are. So I’m not sure I would agree that we “all should know” who the (hypothetical) rich black family / families at Duke are.</p>

[Bay]

<p>Stephen Speilberg has an adoptive son who is Black. I believe he went to Yale.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

Last year’s numbers for MIT were provided by an admissions officer, and showed Asians being admitted at a rate higher than their proportion in the applicant pool. Asians accounted for 26 percent of applicants… and 30 percent of acceptances.

</p>

<p>Yes, there’s evidence of discrimination right there! LOL.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

In fact there is some evidence (data, not anecdotal) that Asians are actually advantaged in college admissions results, relative to applications of all groups combined.
…
Here’s one example, posted on cc by siserune in April of this year.

</p>

<p>MITChris did not allege that Asians benefited from racial preferences at MIT. That was your interpretation.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>Oh good lord, fabrizio. “Asians are advantaged in admissions results” and “Asians benefit from racial preference” are two entirely different statements. </p>

<p>If Asians account for 26% of applicants and 30% of acceptance, that tells you right there that they are accepted at rates higher than “fair share” in the acceptance pool. In the absence of some super-duper secret cabal muttering that they need to keep Asians down to x%, there’s absolutely no proof of discrimination.</p>