<p>What is the overall white-to-Asian population ratio in the school? This information is necessary to parse your data. </p>
<p>You can’t just point to the top 1% of students as measured by basic credentials, because it could be a sample from (for example) whites in the top 2-3% of the ability distribution but from Asians in the top 7-10%, if Asians (at any given ability level) have different patterns of credential acquisition than whites. If universities are trying to predict performance after admission, instead of ranking the credentials at the time of admission, then taking such effects into account (that is, making the best performance prediction they can from the information available) would tend to deflate the admission rate of Asians compared to whites. The effect would be strongest in the Asian populations that differ most from whites in their credential-seeking behavior, i.e., Chinese and Korean immigrants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are assuming that the relation between credentials and ability is the same for whites and Asians. I haven’t met many whites or Asians who believe that, and if you don’t like observational or anecdotal evidence, there are 30+ years of sociological and education studies saying that academic behavior differs between the two groups. Behavioral differences have an effect on the credential distribution (and later on, the income distribution) and its relation to the ability distribution.</p>
<p>This is patently untrue. Even on CC (in fact, especially so), Asians with equal stats are at a disadvantage to whites. It is known that affirmative action policies hurt Asians at most schools, except some liberal arts colleges. However, for the Ivies, MIT, Stanford, and other top-caliber schools, Asians are disadvantaged.</p>
<p>The user you’re quoting actually went through hundreds of CC postings in results threads for Harvard and similar schools, and tabulated some of the white vs Asian data. You reject the end result, but only because it disconfirms your assumption that Asians are cheated (especially on CC!).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Espenshade’s data (reported in his 2009 book, though actually from 1997) as well as his statistical models of that data showed working-class and lower-middle-class Asians doing better in admissions than whites with the same credentials. He also found that in comparison to whites, Asians overprepared academically (which would inflate their credentials) and then underperformed their credentials after admission to college. All this has been known informally for a very long time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You appear to assume that it is unfair for colleges to respond to, or even notice, applicant behavior that differs between groups.</p>
<p>No? I am in favor of affirmative action, even though I am Asian. I’m just saying that it does discriminate against Asians. Do I sometimes wish that I was a URM in order to get into the college of my dreams? Yes, but I quickly dismiss those thoughts as I would not give up who I am just to get into college.</p>
<p>When UC Berkeley stopped using affirmative action policies, the percentage of Asians admitted rose dramatically in comparison to all other groups, including whites.</p>
<p>The UC after prop.209 also got a population that has more National Merit Scholars per capita for whites than Asians. Whereas under an Ivy League anti-Asian discrimination theory, there should have been a lot of extra Asians with National Merit designations (this is somewhat above the Ivy qualification threshold) pushed into the UC system because Stanford and the Ivies had unfairly rejected them. Instead there was an Asian deficit of about 150-180 National Merit scholarships relative to whites. That’s from data around 2003-4.</p>
<p>(added: ) Also, UC is not a guide to what is true for the Ivy League, due to the much higher Asian/white ratio in California, and the lower admission standard compared to the top national universities.</p>
<p>I dont think you believe that Asians are disadvantaged for top colleges.</p>
<p>Good for you! </p>
<p>My own experience from my HS does not support your claim.</p>
<p>A few years ago, however, when I worked as a reader for Yales Office of Undergraduate Admissions, it became immediately clear to me that Asians - who constitute 5 percent of the US population - faced an uphill slog. They tended to get excellent scores, take advantage of AP offerings, and shine in extracurricular activities. Frequently, they also had hard-knock stories: families that had immigrated to America under difficult circumstances, parents working as kitchen assistants and store clerks, and households in which no English was spoken.
But would Yale be willing to make 50 percent of its freshman class Asian? Probably not.</p>
<p>Upon reading many impressive AsA applications on this forum, (I’ll assume they’re 100% correct), I have this insight: 2nd tier schools (by Asian standards, any school that is not HYPSM) like Columbia, Dartmouth, Cornell, Rice, UChicago etc. tend to accept these impressive applicants (those with high stats), whereas HYPSM are more random. They accept not necessarily those with high stats (example: silverturtle and christiansoldier— idk if that was his name, I think he was accepted to Princeton but not Yale or Harvard) but tend to accept those with great personalities. This may not be 100% correct, but at least it’s true for most that I’ve witnessed.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Please use old threads for information only, do you post on them and revive them.</p></li>
<li><p>Comments about affirmative action belong on the Race FAQ sticky thread at the top of this forum.</p></li>
</ol>