Okay, so I know Asian Americans aren’t really an URM. In fact, marking oneself as an Asian American can be detrimental. However, Asian Americans make up a WHOLE LOT of different groups.
What about Filipinos, Pacific Islanders, Laos, Cambodia, etc.? Do they still have just as hard of a time?
<p>I'm Filipina and according to UCSD stats from last year, the highest scoring/highest gpa group was Filipino's...bleh, (I'm not that stellar) so I'm not marking the ethnicity box (I have a white name :) )</p>
<p>I guess if the college has a separate box for each asianility, like the uc's, it might matter versus colleges that just have a general asian box. i don't know.</p>
<p>I think most colleges clump Asians into one box, but schools might look at a student's individual life experience and take that into account. For example, if you're a recent refugee who's managed to do well in school, a university may accept him even if his scores are slightly lower than another student because he's had to overcome so much and he still managed to do well in high school.</p>
<p>collegebound123:</p>
<p>Look on the parent forum under the thread Minorities</p>
<p>i'm checking the asian box. Damn me if I'm going to get into college as anyone else.</p>
<p>What I dont understand is why a student who is Black gets accepted to college when he/she is under qualified. But a student who is Asian who is over qualified most likely wont get in when competing with a Latino and African American student. Asians have the lowest admission rates at elite and ivy league colleges. This is because if the college has a percentage of students that is more than the US population made up of Asians (which is about 4%) the Asians are the ones who get the lowest acceptance, lower than White students. Even though there can be a 64% White population in any college as long as it doesnt pass the US population of White people they wont get the short end of the stick in admissions (usually its the Asians). It strongly based on numbers which is completely wrong and unfair.</p>
<p>Mystic,
Unfortunately, that's the reality of it. Been there, done that w/D last yr. After she had completed and sent in 4 applications before the start of senior yr, GC "suggested" not to self-identify!? I asked a colleague who had worked at several colleges--including Dartmouth--and he didn't think it was a bad idea! Bottomline...she IS Asian...that's how it went down on paper. A couple of URM classmates--with lower stats--did amazingly well. D ended up--and is thrilled with--her 4th/5th ranked school! It all worked out at the end...</p>
<p>Mystic221, I would not worry about who is "overqualified" and who is "underqualified." Adcoms at elite schools are in the business of building a COMMUNITY. I am not a URM, but I am very happy that my children's schools have chosen to look beyond mere stats to provide a wonderful class of diverse and fascinating peole of all colors, races, religions, etc. God, can you imagine if top schools just let (for example) top-stat valedictorians in? The past several years our school's valedictorians have been extremely boring grade-grubbers (THIS COMES FROM THE TEACHERS!), while many kids behind them in GPA have been creative and passionate kids, all of whom did or are doing fantastically well in college. </p>
<p>Schools and also businesses in the US have many, MANY reasons for wanting URMs.
You need to get over the illusion that college admissions are - or should be - strictly NUMBERS driven. </p>
<p>BTW, SAT scores predict very little.</p>
<p>"Mystic221, I would not worry about who is "overqualified" and who is "underqualified." Adcoms at elite schools are in the business of building a COMMUNITY. I am not a URM, but I am very happy that my children's schools have chosen to look beyond mere stats to provide a wonderful class of diverse and fascinating peole of all colors, races, religions, etc. God, can you imagine if top schools just let (for example) top-stat valedictorians in? The past several years our school's valedictorians have been extremely boring grade-grubbers (THIS COMES FROM THE TEACHERS!), while many kids behind them in GPA have been creative and passionate kids, all of whom did or are doing fantastically well in college.</p>
<p>Schools and also businesses in the US have many, MANY reasons for wanting URMs.
You need to get over the illusion that college admissions are - or should be - strictly NUMBERS driven.</p>
<p>BTW, SAT scores predict very little."</p>
<p>It is wrong to accept a person and reject another person because of the color of their skin. Thats is AA does. It is wrong to set caps on Asian Americican admissions and that is what AA does. It is wrong to set the standards for Asian Americans and Whites significantly higher than for URM. It is discrimination, and diveristy through discrimination is not what I would want. Looking beyond GPA and SAT is one thing but rejecting someone because of the color of their skin is another thing.</p>
<p>I have addressed this issue on the Parents Forum. AA is not the only issue that "discriminates" against a number of applicants. There are many issues that up a student's chances at the cost of other students that have nothing to do with academics. In some countries, admissions is contingent on a test score. That way the playing field is level for everyone. In our country, universities are more than just academic centers, but are communities so all sorts of attributes other than academic prowress are sought. In the top schools, half of the applicant review is on non academic issues and Harvard has publicly announced that less than a third of their admits are academic admits. Other factors play heavily in the equation as to whether someone is admitted.</p>
<p>The situation with URMs is a hotbed of contention these days. Though we can swallow (though barely) the fact that even the top schools have football teams and in order to field a decent team, the academics for those candidates needs to be downplayed in their assessment process for admittance to the school, color for color's sake, is becoming phrase of resentment. The question is whether it is worth it for the school to assess the pool of URMs differently from that of regular applicants, in order to have a certain threshhold of URMs at the school. Just as the question of whether it is worth it for a school to have a hockey, basketball or football team when these sports certainly have no effect on the academics at the school. The answer to both of those questions are answered by the universities themselves, and that they are legally permitted to answer these question within certain constraints as been upheld in the highest court of this country and supported by the top universities in this country. </p>
<p>Personally, I agree with the colleges on this one but it is a controversial subject. I feel very strongly that certain groups of people who are so strongly represented in are country should be represented in the top colleges. I have gone on in detail along this line in other threads, but as in many issues, those who have strongly made up their minds on the subject are not going to even want to follow the argument, so vehement are they in their stance. I can tell you that though I agree with the URM designation and treatment, it saddens me greatly that this should have to exist in order to have representative numbers of these minorities. We should be working hard at solving the problem at hand which is why so few URMs can make the academic and test score standards at elite colleges so that this particular pool of applicants can be integrated into the general group. But the standards themselves should be examined as well. Anytime you have a single test counting so heavily in a situation, you will have group of people focusing their lives on that test instead of living life and developing as full person. Colleges do not want this happening either. I make a living doing test prep and I get children who have been spending hours each day practicing tests since they could hold a penci instead of spending time on other aspects of life. And these are the kids who test the best--no surprises here. </p>
<p>To answer the OP's question, if you look at the ethnicity and race questions on college apps, they generally have a subgroup for Asians called Pacific Islanders and others, a designation they do specifically define. I do not know of any specific URM program targetting this group, nor do I know how any given college treats this subgroup, but the designation is there. More than half the kids I tutor are Asian and most of them do not fill in any blank, nor do the caucasian kids in general. I urge them to fill in the blanks simply because we cannot track what is happening without this information. The colleges do not fill in your ethicity or racial group for you--they go by what you report, so the numbers are only as accurate as what is reported. So Asians seem to me to be under reported whereas Blacks, Hispanics and American Indians who have an advantage in reporting their ethnicity would be more fully accounted for. I have noted a discrepancy between the numbers of Asians reported at a number of elite colleges and the visual count from the face books I have seen.</p>
<p>VTboy, I don't know of a college in the entire country that rejects people solely on the color of their skin. Not one.</p>
<p>And don't forget - if we are talking about PRIVATE colleges, they can build their communities any way they see fit. If they want all gay oboe players from New Mexico one year, what business is it of anyone's?</p>
<p>Put forth your best effort with what you have. If you've worked hard throughout high school, prepped for the SAT, developed strong relationships with your teachers, and an active member of your class, then you've done your job. Not everyone--even the 1600 student--gets into their 1st choice college. Try to look beyond the AA factor...the controversy exists...and it will not go away anytime soon...so don't let it consume you.</p>
<p>"VTboy, I don't know of a college in the entire country that rejects people solely on the color of their skin. Not one.</p>
<p>And don't forget - if we are talking about PRIVATE colleges, they can build their communities any way they see fit. If they want all gay oboe players from New Mexico one year, what business is it of anyone's?"</p>
<p>First AA is about rejecting someone solely based on the color of their skin, colleges with AA do that on a regular basis. When you have an Asian applicant is much more qualified than an Afirican American applicant. They will often reject the Asian applicant in favor of the african american one, soley based on his/her skin color.</p>
<p>Two private colleges get federal research money all the time, so I do care how they admit people. You can't tell me if a private university banned african americans you wouldn't care.</p>
<p>"Personally, I agree with the colleges on this one but it is a controversial subject. I feel very strongly that certain groups of people who are so strongly represented in are country should be represented in the top colleges. I have gone on in detail along this line in other threads, but as in many issues, those who have strongly made up their minds on the subject are not going to even want to follow the argument, so vehement are they in their stance. I can tell you that though I agree with the URM designation and treatment, it saddens me greatly that this should have to exist in order to have representative numbers of these minorities. We should be working hard at solving the problem at hand which is why so few URMs can make the academic and test score standards at elite colleges so that this particular pool of applicants can be integrated into the general group. But the standards themselves should be examined as well. Anytime you have a single test counting so heavily in a situation, you will have group of people focusing their lives on that test instead of living life and developing as full person. Colleges do not want this happening either. I make a living doing test prep and I get children who have been spending hours each day practicing tests since they could hold a penci instead of spending time on other aspects of life. And these are the kids who test the best--no surprises here."</p>
<p>There is NO reason why URM can't score just as well as other groups. If you talking about poverty level and social status that is mute, because there are Asian subgroups who have historically in recent history were worst off than African Americans but were able have their children excel on academics. For example Vietnamese who one time had poverty levels worst than African Americans, but who children in recent history have done better than whites on academics. I grew up in poverty so I know that growing up poor isn't an excuss as to why you do poorly in school.</p>
<p>VTBoy - no college has banned Asians, so asking me how I'd feel if colleges banned African Americans is irrelevant. </p>
<p>As for private colleges that get federal money: if they are awarded research grants, the taxpayer (such as me - I paid over $80,000 in taxes last year) is paid back if the research is done. That's ALL the college owes me. Bye now!</p>
<p>VTboy, the issue is not Asian vs URMs. They are not pitted against each other in admissions. The fact that URMs are a tagged category is something that affects anyone who is not in that category, not just Asians. As for poverty, that is not a tagged category, regardless of what the ethnic background. In fact some elite colleges that are not needblind will count poverty against you as they do not have the funds for everyone who applies. I don't want to even think about the backlash if poverty or disadvantage became a tagged category. I do not believe that people will be so benevolent about this if it indeed became a favored category.</p>
<p>In my opinion, poverty is just one problem facing disadvantaged kids. The biggest one is the lack of support from family. Presently, URMs do not put the time and push into test taking as other groups do. They do not feel it is as important ( my opinion). And they may well be right. Asians often come from family units where not only is education important, but test taking practices start at a very young age. Walking through any Asian neighborhood,you will see many test taking classes. This is emphasized as the thing to do as scoring high on tests is considered a highly desirable accomplishment. I have never gotten an Asian kid in one of my tutoring or SAT classes who has not already been testprepped heavily. I get many kids who have never sat for a 3 hour test before. Who the heck do you think is going to do better on the SAT? It is no contest. And yet it is highly questionable whether test prep is a valuable use of time in developing a child into a citizen, particularly the type the elite colleges want. In fact if you ask any adcom about this, the arms would go up in horror. The type of lives these colleges want are diverse, and the only way they are going to get this is by getting a diverse population with many different interests. So I am not sure if we want URMs necessarily spending an inordinate amount of time studying for tests. In fact I believe we want to move away from an emphasis on these tests and make them an even smaller part of the resume than they are now.At least that is the lip service the elite colleges are giving.</p>
<p>"VTBoy - no college has banned Asians, so asking me how I'd feel if colleges banned African Americans is irrelevant. "</p>
<p>Grossly limiting the number of Asians they will accept is no better than an out right ban. Also you said you don't care who private colleges admit, so my point is valid on two counts.</p>
<p>I'm Asian. I, personally, feel bad for the URMs who get in based on the color of their skin. I would hate that. I know some people who are black and/or hispanic and refuse to mark the box for their race because they want to get in based on merit. And I absolutely respect that. I would feel dirty as hell if... say... Harvard all of a sudden decided to go all-out asian and started rejecting more-qualified students just to accept me because I'm asian and I'd fill a quota they needed. </p>
<p>If you think about it, it's detrimental to many races. First and most obviously, it's detrimental to those who are asian and white whose spots are taken by POSSIBLY less qualified URMs. And the less obvious negative effect is toward the URMs themselves. I'm not saying that this is RIGHT because it absolutely isn't, but a black person at Harvard is looked at differently than a white person there or an asian person there. They receive less credit for their achievements than the non-URM. They may be just as qualified if not MORE so than the whites and asians applying there and may have gotten in based on merit alone, but the color of their skin subjects them to judgment and that's never something we want to promote.</p>
<p>"There is NO reason why URM can't score just as well as other groups...I grew up in poverty so I know that growing up poor isn't an excuss as to why you do poorly in school." - vtboy</p>
<p>sorry for bringing this up, but i would like to comment on this. </p>
<p>I am part of an organization called Let's Get Ready. I tutor SATs and College Prep for free to local high school students who are disadvantaged (aka poor) and unfortunately, these kids who are here are already very determined to go to college and/or successful in school and readily grab any help they can get. I say unfortunately because that is not true of everyone, and thus don't ask for my help. You say Vietnamese are poor and yet they are doing better than whites on academics. well, guess why? their parents probably pushed them very hard to do well. the URM that is poor most likely have parents who don't care, and perhaps may even exhibit anti-social behavior (anti-social = drug/alcohol abuser, depressed, etc). when you have parents who are hard workers and push you it is much easier to succeed than to have parents who are mildly satisfied with where they are and don't care about their kid's education. that is not to say that there aren't kids who succeed despite poor parenting or kids who fail despite great parenting. (as I always say to the kids i tutor "being [so and so] should not be an excuse for failure, but a reason for success")</p>
<p>It is true that growing up poor (despite race) shouldn't be an excuse to do poorly in school, but it can be a huge factor. Consider a 15 year old poor boy (despite race) working 20hrs a week to help bring in money to his family. He won't have as much time studying and doing academics as someone else who doesn't have to work. </p>
<p>since you are vietnamese, i can ask you to just look at the school system in Vietnam. Do you see many of those poor kids there doing as well as the rich kids? no, therefore, poverty does play a role in how well one does in academics.</p>
<p>At the risk of entering the thicket of the battle, I would remind all of you that the issue of race-based affirmative action is more complicated than simple poverty. Not all URM's are poor, and not all unpreferrred students (whites and Asians) are rich. And the fact is, studies have shown that affirmative action disproportionately benefits those URM's who are already quite well off. And this happens not just in the US, but in all other countries that have implemented affirmative action - whether it's India, Malaysia, or any other country. Study after study has shown that affirmative action disproportionately benefits those who are members of the preferred group who are already quite well off, when compared to the average of that group. You can read the works of Sowell for proof, but basically, affirmative action in favor of African-Americans has disproportionately helped middle and upper-class African-Americans, just like affirmative action in Malaysia has disproportionately helped well-off Malays. </p>
<p>Speaking only for myself, I find it extremely difficult, from a social justice standpoint, to defend a policy that grants preference to a middle-class or upper-class African-American over a poor Asian-American or Caucasian. Yet numerous studies have demonstrated that that's precisely what happens. .</p>