<p>High-achieving Asian-American students are being shut out of top schools around the country. Is this what diversity looks like now?</p>
<p>Grace Wong has felt the sting of intolerance quite literally, in the rocks thrown at her in Australia, where she pursued a PhD after leaving her native China. In the Boston area, where she’s lived since 1996, she recalls a fellow customer at the deli counter in a Chestnut Hill supermarket telling her to go back to her own country. When Wong’s younger son was born, she took a drastic measure to help protect him, at least on paper, from discrimination: She changed his last name to one that doesn’t sound Asian.</p>
<p>“It’s a difficult time to be Chinese,” says Wong, a scientist who develops medical therapies. “There’s a lot of jealousy out there, because the Chinese do very well. And some people see that as a threat.”</p>
<p>It’s sad, yes. But no one can really prove they were rejected because of race, as each college can claim that person wasn’t a perfect fit for that class.</p>
<p>What a joke. 9AP courses and a perfect SAT? I hope there’s a WHOLE lot more to that story or this kid is just completely ridiculous.</p>
<p>Anyways, with Asians so drastically overrepresented, I have no problem with a little “affirmative action” for all other races. Levels the playing field. Compared to the educational and disciplinary environment that most Chinese children are raised under and the deeply rooted traditions/culture that they grow into, all other races are practically disadvantaged in comparison. According to a Princeton study, increasing the % of Asians admitted would almost entirely eliminate URM population. If this argument is against preserving even somewhat proportional representation and diversity, remove the Chinese taglines and make a new topic.</p>
<p>^how does it level the playing field?? It’s not like it’s necessarily easier for Asians to get in. Economic- based AA, sure. but race- based?? I mean it sucks for someone to have a 4.0, but not have it count as much as someone else’s 4.0. what are you supposed to do?? raise your GPA?</p>
<p>As an Asian-American junior, I can’t count how many fellow Asians have muttered these five words: “I wish I was black.” It’s because of one reason: if you’re a non-Asian minority, your chances to be accepted into your dream colleges are better. </p>
<p>I won’t deny that some Asians have a better environment to work in than other races. Of course, however, if you want to attend college, you MUST work hard. No one gets into HYP without intense study sessions. Gladwell’s 10,000 hour rule proves itself with high school studies.</p>
<p>This year, my Asian friend applied to three Ivies, JHU (his dream school), Rice, Emory, Tufts, other top 30s I don’t remember, and Rutgers. 4.0 GPA, 2170 SAT, ridiculous ECs showing his passion and skill for the clarinet and basketball, sexy recs, good essays. He gets rejected everywhere except RU 6-year Pharm.</p>
<p>In the meantime an African American senior gets a 3.6 GPA, 2000 SAT, ECs pertaining to music as well, okay recs and average essays (as he says). JHU 2015.</p>
<p>I’m terrified (edited the caps here) that I won’t get into Michigan, a school I’ve loved since freshman year. My GPA took many hits because I passed up easy A classes for APs; I’m looking at a 3.66-3.72. Despite my 2340 SAT, I’m already anxious because I know that, because of AA I may be passed up in favor of a URM with lesser stats. And it’s all because of one factor I can never control.</p>
<p>I don’t understand the point of this thread</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The outrage in the original article seems to hinge on the notion that the schools won’t admit that they are discriminating against Asians</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>and</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Chi Chi Wu seems to think she will go into court and use statistics to prove that the universities are discriminating. So what? The Supreme Court says that they can discriminate. What they are doing is perfectly legal. It is also legal for them not to admit to what they are doing. I really don’t see the point of this thread.</p>
<p>It levels the playing field because on average, every other race is disadvantaged when compared to the Asian race. The UC’s are perfect proof- A group that represents 5% of the US population is occupying 50% of the population at UC Irvine. While some may find this perfectly acceptable, others feel that the playing field should be leveled to give the disadvantaged races (aka. all races) a better shot. Diversity is valuable (and, some would say, fair). </p>
<p>At the end of the day, it’s question of the value of diversity and proportional representation, and about the fairness of affirmative action. Some believe diversity is worthless and everyone should be compared exactly as they are. Others believe diversity is valuable and the playing field should be leveled for those who are disadvantaged.</p>
<p>If a college chooses to value diversity, so be it. They’re allowed to. And it makes a ton logical sense.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court also said that segregation was legal in 1896. Would you have told civil rights protesters to give up because the Supreme Court had already determined the legality of what they opposed? </p>
<p>The fact that Supreme Court has sanctioned affirmative action says nothing about whether is just or whether it will remain legal. In fact, our current Supreme Court would likely rule against affirmative action.</p>
<p>I totally agree transfers2010. I think a compelling case can be made against affirmative action but you better get someone other than Chi Chi Wu to do it. She seems to think the issue is getting the schools to admit they do it. Everyone knows that they do it and I don’t see what she will have gained with any statistical proof.</p>
<p>Exactly what did Asian American students do to cause, for example, European American students to be somehow disadvantaged? Study harder / smarter, get good grades in school, do well in CB / ETS tests, and have interesting activities outside of school? Isn’t that what K-12 students (of all ethnic groups) are supposed to do to prepare to go to a university?</p>
<p>Are you suggesting that, because Asian American students “played by the rules” (rules that Asian American people had little influence, relative to members of other ethnic groups, in creating) that the rules should be changed because European American students are “losing”?</p>
<p>Non-asian races aren’t disadvantaged because of their race;
asians aren’t high-achievers because they’re asian or because they’re rich. I’m a first-generation immigrant who won’t be able to pay for college, and I work my *** off for my grades etc.</p>
<p>I understand that certain people (note: people, not races) are at a socioeconomic disadvantage and won’t have the same resources as others, but this has limited correlation with race.</p>
<p>When some white people advocate AA against ORMs, I feel that they are making excuses for their lack of hard work.</p>
<p>The European American student, is on average, disadvantaged compared to Asians, just as African Americans and Hispanics are, on average, disadvantaged compared to all other races.</p>
<p>European Americans aren’t raised in a culture/environment that stresses work ethic and education as severely as Asians. This tradition is deeeeply rooted in Asian culture. Thus, the European American is relatively disadvantaged.</p>
<p>So yes, I am suggesting, that by being part of a culture that ingrains characteristics to make help them “play” the game better, the so called “rules” should be changed to help those “losers” who did not have the wonderful advantage of having those characteristics ingrained into their culture. </p>
<p>Look, I believe in affirmative action, you don’t. I believe that if an entire ethnicity is disadvantaged on average, they deserve to be placed on a level playing field. You believe that just because the Asian culture and tradition leads to, on average, a stronger college profile, that everyone should still be evaluated as they stand. My belief results in a diverse and proportionally representative campus that I consider just. Your belief results in a far less diverse and extremely skewed proportions that you consider just. That’s fine. Currently the Ivies and the Supreme Court appear to agree with me. Could change.</p>
<p>Hasn’t this topic been done to death already? I’m Asian American, had a 2340 SAT, near perfect GPA, excellent credentials etc. and was rejected at almost all Ivies. And yet I’m not bitter. In middle school my school was more than 50% Asian and my high school was around 20% AA. Trust me, high school was a breath of fresh air compared to middle school, and a large factor for that was race. </p>
<p>Colleges are perfectly justified in promoting diversity on campuses. Deal with it, people.</p>
<p>Yes, let’s punish people for working hard and making great achievements. The whole issue of affirmative action in this case is almost sickening.</p>
<p>You’re not punishing those who are working hard. You’re giving a boost to those who weren’t raised in a culture that has such an incredible work ethic and dedication to education.</p>
<p>Asians score higher on the SAT on average. You’re totally ignorant if you think that’s because every single Asian makes some conscious effort to work hard whereas those of other ethnicities consciously choose to work less hard. It’s totally cultural. If I was raised by traditional Asian parents and culture, I’d surely have a higher SAT score and GPA. Imagine if my parents didn’t care at all or weren’t around- something far less prevalent in Asian culture. Having an Asian stile childhood in that case would make scores/GPA skyrocket.</p>
<p>The slight affirmative action essentially compensates for the fact that some don’t have access to that incredible advantage. It’s not fair to directly compare ethnicity X to Asians when Asians have this cultural advantage.</p>