are colleges racist?

[Fairness]

<p>Pizzagirl: You seem to be on this board all the time.</p>

<p>“you just don’t have a case.” Do you have concrete proof and systematic data to prove your point that Asian-American students with SAT 2300-2400 lack ex-curricular activities? No, you don’t!</p>

[annasdad]

<br>

<p>At my daughter’s high school <snip> What’s wrong with this?</snip></p>

<br>

<p>Did you read her essay? Maybe it went something like this:</p>

<p>“I want to be a doctor because my mom and dad expect me to be a doctor and I don’t want to disappoint them.”</p>

<p>Now it probably didn’t say that. But as someone upthread has pointed out, until you know (1) what the specific college was looking for, and (2) everything in the applicant’s package, you can’t really say why a given applicant was or was not accepted.</p>

<p>I also have a real problem with the generalizations on this thread (from both sides). Unless you know the down-and-dirty details of a specific institution’s applicant pool (academics, interests, essays, recommendations) as well as racial makeup, you’re shooting in the dark; and even if you know that for one institution, you cannot reasonably generalize it to all top-tier universities.</p>

[epiphany]

<p>

If adcoms “really didn’t like Asians,” they are doing a very poor job of showing it, LOL.

</p>

<p>Indeed. Further, the more important point is that the committees (the universities) are greedy. They have no reason not to want the best and the brightest. That’s why there are so many capable Asians in elite universities, because so many Asians, along with so many whites, are included among those of the super-excellent variety, both well-rounded (character-wise, interest-wise) and highly achieved. It’s an entirely unbalanced selection that the universities have: unbalanced in favor of excellence from many categories and many personal backgrounds, so that their choices are ridiculously abundant.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

Do you have concrete proof and systematic data to prove your point that Asian-American students with SAT 2300-2400 lack ex-curricular activities? No, you don’t!

</p>

<p>I never said any such thing.<br>
And I’m downloading huge files for work that are hogging my computer, so I have plenty of time, but thanks for your concern :-)</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

If adcoms “really didn’t like Asians,” they are doing a very poor job of showing it, LOL.

</p>

<p>As anti-Semitic as Lowell was, why was he willing to live with 15%, a percentage already vastly greater than that of Jews in the population at-large in the 1930s? Has anybody read a biography that would shed light on why fifteen was the magic number? Maybe he picked fifteen to make it harder for Jews to complain about the discriminatory nature of his holistic admissions policy.</p>

<p>

Do you have concrete proof and systematic data to prove your point that Asian-American students with SAT 2300-2400 lack ex-curricular activities? No, you don’t!

</p>

<p>Often times, Pizzagirl and company like to pounce on people who say that the higher average SAT scores of whites/Asians relative to "URM"s at elite institutions is unfair to the whites/Asians by reflexively whipping out their “SAT isn’t everything!” line.</p>

<p>But there’s a flip side to that. Why aren’t the average SAT scores of whites/Asians the same as those of "URM"s? Pizzagirl and Co. will always say that past some score, everyone can “do the work.”</p>

<p>Well, everyone means everyone, so again–why don’t we see more whites/Asians with SAT scores on average the same as those of "URM"s at the elites? They can do the work, too, can’t they? Are the "URM"s with score X really more “interesting/compelling” than the whites/Asians with score X?</p>

[mokusatsu]

<p>

@fabrizio

Again, WHY do you think asians suffer from discrimination, and what is the bsis for your claims?

I repeat what I wrote in #1150: “I again reiterate that if racial preferences were the minor thing its supporters claim it is, then the enrollment of Asians at the “top” UCs should not have changed, percentage-wise, following Proposition 209. But they did change; they increased.”

Are you once again drawing conclusions about “HYPS et al” based on data from one school?</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

…the “top” UCs…

Are you once again drawing conclusions about “HYPS et al” based on data from one school?

</p>

<p>Would you like to rephrase your question?</p>

[johnwesley]

<p>

Well, everyone means everyone, so again–why don’t we see more whites/Asians with SAT scores on average the same as those of "URM"s at the elites? They can do the work, too, can’t they? Are the "URM"s with score X really more “interesting/compelling” than the whites/Asians with score X?

</p>

<p>My anecdotal answer to that is that SAT scores correlate highly with class and whites with scores say, <1500 probably don’t get encouraged to attend colleges far from home, or four year colleges at all. They’re treated the way URMs were treated and to some extent still are, steered into trade or vocational schools. And, yes to the extent low-scoring URMs can show they are doing something with there lives outside the norm, beyond the expected, they are more interesting than whites or Asians with the same scores.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

My anecdotal answer to that is that SAT scores correlate highly with class and whites with scores say, <1500 probably don’t get encouraged to attend colleges far from home, or four year colleges at all. They’re treated the way URMs were treated and to some extent still are, steered into trade or vocational schools.

</p>

<p>I’m a bit confused here.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Are you saying that the average SAT score for "URM"s at elites is <1500 out of 2400?</p></li>
<li><p>If so, are you saying that if we encouraged more whites with scores <1500 to apply, we might see more of them at those schools? (Isn’t this the same as epiphany’s argument that to get the “UR” out of “URM,” just get more to apply?)</p></li>
</ol>

<p>

And, yes to the extent low-scoring URMs can show they are doing something with there lives outside the norm, beyond the expected, they are more interesting than whites or Asians with the same scores.

</p>

<p>But are they more interesting than whites or Asians who are also “doing something with their lives outside the norm”? Are the only students with score X who “[do] something with their lives outside the norm” "URM"s?</p>

<p>Besides, what is “the norm” anyway?</p>

[johnwesley]

<p>

I’m a bit confused here.</p>

<ol>
<li>Are you saying that the average SAT score for "URM"s at elites is <1500 out of 2400?

</li>
</ol>

<p>No, I’m just using it as an example. If anyone has a better citation, I’ll defer to them.</p>

<p>

2. If so, are you saying that if we encouraged more whites with scores <1500 to apply, we might see more of them at those schools? (Isn’t this the same as epiphany’s argument that to get the “UR” out of “URM,” just get more to apply?)

</p>

<p>That’s neither what I’m saying, nor do I think that would necessarily happen. Can’t be sure if that’s what Epiphany or anyone else said fifty posts ago.</p>

<p>

Quote:
And, yes to the extent low-scoring URMs can show they are doing something with there lives outside the norm, beyond the expected, they are more interesting than whites or Asians with the same scores. </p>

<p>But are they more interesting than whites or Asians who are also “doing something with their lives outside the norm”? Are the only students with score X who “[do] something with their lives outside the norm” "URM"s?

</p>

<p>I’d like to see those whites and those Asians apply in greater numbers to elite colleges and hopefully through programs like Questbridge they will.</p>

<p>

Besides, what is “the norm” anyway?

</p>

<p>That’s always going to be a subjective judgment.</p>

[mokusatsu]

<p>

Would you like to rephrase your question?

The University of California is one university with ten campuses.</p>

<p>If you prefer, and since you do not consider UCSD to be an elite school, you can answer the question for two schools.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

Why aren’t the average SAT scores of whites/Asians the same as those of "URM"s? Pizzagirl and Co. will always say that past some score, everyone can “do the work.”

</p>

<p>Both of these statements can be true at the same time …</p>

<p>1) The average SAT scores of whites and Asians are higher than those of URM’s: At the overall population level (which is certainly true / documented) and therefore likely within the subset of those who apply to elite colleges.<br>
2) Elite colleges don’t believe that a higher SAT score is necessarily “more qualified,” and they have said REPEATEDLY that past a certain score, the student is qualified to do the work. That does not mean that there is not some benefit that accrues to higher scores, and indeed higher scores do often have a higher likelihood of admittance, but it’s not a simple 2400 > 2300 > 2200 type of calculation.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

And, yes to the extent low-scoring URMs can show they are doing something with there lives outside the norm, beyond the expected, they are more interesting than whites or Asians with the same scores. </p>

<p>But are they more interesting than whites or Asians who are also “doing something with their lives outside the norm”?

</p>

<p>But they don’t NEED to be “more interesting than whites or Asians who also doing something with their lives outside the norm.” They just need to be “interesting enough to make the adcom say that they would be valuable additions to the class.” The class isn’t being built on a head-by-head comparison basis, it’s built on an overall basis. The underlying assumption here is that the adcoms are literally choosing just between URM #1 with scores and EC’s of X, and Asian #2 with scores and EC’s of Y. It’s not head to head like that.</p>

<p>

Are the only students with score X who “[do] something with their lives outside the norm” "URM"s?

</p>

<p>No. Who said that? Why are you straw manning? Who has said that there aren’t plenty of interesting, compelling Asian students? Not me, and certainly not elite schools, who are admitting plenty of them!</p>

<p>The fact that Asian acceptance hasn’t reached the level that you personally (and perhaps biasedly) think it <em>should</em> be doesn’t mean that discrimination has occurred. As a straw man, I could say that I think Jews are the smartest people and therefore they should be 60% of all elite college admissions, but the colleges not hitting that level doesn’t mean that therefore they’ve discriminated against Jews.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

The University of California is one university with ten campuses.

</p>

<p>True but pedantic. Do you ever hear people saying “I went to UC” without specifying which campus? For all practical purposes, it is ten schools.</p>

<p>

If you prefer, and since you do not consider UCSD to be an elite school, you can answer the question for two schools.

</p>

<p>Now that you’ve rephrased your question, my answer is yes.</p>

<p>Also kindly note that at Michigan, “URM” enrollment has decreased but has not disappeared, unless you want to argue that 8% is 0%.</p>

[bovertine]

<p>This term “straw manning” is funny.</p>

<p>What is it called when you bring up a red herring?</p>

<p>Red herringing?</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

1. The average SAT scores of whites and Asians are higher than those of URM’s: At the overall population level (which is certainly true / documented) and therefore likely within the subset of those who apply to elite colleges.

</p>

<p>That’s not relevant if “past a certain score, the student is qualified to do the work.” A white student with score X + 200 shouldn’t be more qualified, all else equal, than a white student with score X. So again, why aren’t the average SAT scores of whites/Asians the same as those for "URM"s?</p>

<p>

2. …That does not mean that there is not some benefit that accrues to higher scores, and indeed higher scores do often have a higher likelihood of admittance, but it’s not a simple 2400 > 2300 > 2200 type of calculation.

</p>

<p>Oh. So there is a benefit but it’s complicated, and God forbid if anyone with this mysterious benefit thinks he’s “more qualified” than someone without it, am I right?</p>

<p>This is the first time you’ve said this, right? It’s not at all obvious given how often you and company say “the SAT isn’t everything,” just to let you know.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

They just need to be “interesting enough to make the adcom say that they would be valuable additions to the class.”

</p>

<p>Then you don’t need to consider racial classification, do you? A holistic application has enough information for the adcom to decide whether to say “This student is a valuable addition to our incoming class!”</p>

<p>

No. Who said that? Why are you straw manning? Who has said that there aren’t plenty of interesting, compelling Asian students? Not me, and certainly not elite schools, who are admitting plenty of them!

</p>

<p>Quoting with context makes the picture clearer. I asked, "Are the “URM"s with score X really more “interesting/compelling” than the whites/Asians with score X?”</p>

<p>johnwesley replied, “…to the extent low-scoring URMs can show they are doing something with there lives outside the norm, beyond the expected, they are more interesting than whites or Asians with the same scores.”</p>

<p>I replied, "Are the only students with score X who “[do] something with their lives outside the norm” “URM"s?”</p>

<p>So you see, johnwesley gave me a conditional “yes” to my question, but his comparison wasn’t X-to-X. My reply tried to get an X-to-X comparison. That was all.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

The fact that Asian acceptance hasn’t reached the level that you personally (and perhaps biasedly) think it <em>should</em> be doesn’t mean that discrimination has occurred.

</p>

<p>Could you please explain why Asian enrollment increased at the two flagship UC campuses after Proposition 209? Maybe there’s some confounding variable at play that would explain the increase instead of the legislation. Would you care to offer an alternate explanation?</p>

[mokusatsu]

<p>

True but pedantic.

One man’s pedantry is another man’s lyric.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/1162764-how-disadvantaged-asians.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/1162764-how-disadvantaged-asians.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;