<p>I read somewhere that only about 2000 blacks a year break 1300 on the SAT. I would think that the figure for hispanics is probably similar. I am hispanic and scored a 1270. Do I at all have a shot at ivy league schools.</p>
<p>You might, depends on your GPA and class rank stuff like that. Ivys don't all go on SAT/ACT alone.</p>
<p>You have a shot. It's all a matter of context and the case you make for yourself. It will, however, be an uphill climb at Ivy, as there are many URMs with much higher scores (1400-1600 SAT and 30s ACT) applying to these schools. There is an outstanding group of URMs at HY. I know of one black 1600 SAT Harvard class of '08. There are URM (black, Hispanic) U.S. presidential scholar semifinalists (i.e. sky high test scores) at HY class of '08. URM presidential scholars applied '08. Some URMs with 1400+ have been flat-out rejected. You are competing with a lot of URMs who are from first- or second- generation immigrant families. They have high achievement motivation, with test scores to match anyone, bar none. Just a little reality check.</p>
<p>Carnegie Mellon gives l;ittle known FULL TUITION SCHOLARSHIPS AND ROOM AND BOARD to anybody who is Hispanic with SAT's over 1150. You may want to consider it...has good engineering, science, computer science, music and fine arts, architecture, business, and a small and less well known humanities dept. I have a daughter who goes there and her best friend is on a full ride scholarship for architecture. She is Chilean.</p>
<p>Jaman, you are certainly in the high end of the Hispanic applicant pool. As long as your grades are somewhat decent, you should be fine.</p>
<p>Is Chilean Seabass imported from Chile, or is it just regular bass?</p>
<p>it's amusing how people give tuitions for people fully capable of achieving something. are URMs dumber than europeans? give it some speculation. i think all of us who are europeans should be frustrated at this "system" and how it forces the good people out and leaves room for the not-so-good. should **** you all off. ;)</p>
<p>i understand the reasons they weight these things, but i think in focusing on race the admissions people miss the point. The reason few blacks and hispanics have high scores is not due to their being black or hispanic- its the fact that higher percentages of them live in high crime/high poverty areas than whites. </p>
<p>Thus, the current system rewards, for example, the middle class black student at a good public school (who doesnt need any help), and hurts the poor white student in a terrible school in the inner city (who does). They really should be giving more weight to what an applicant comes from rather than the color of their skin if they want to truly help those who need it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Thus, the current system rewards, for example, the middle class black student at a good public school (who doesnt need any help), and hurts the poor white student in a terrible school in the inner city (who does). They really should be giving more weight to what an applicant comes from rather than the color of their skin if they want to truly help those who need it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>THANK YOU :).</p>
<p>I think affirmative action is crap. I don't believe in preferential treatment based on arbitrary distinctions is right. I think assuming someone is poorer or less educated because they are African American or Hispanic is egregious. </p>
<p>I think it's a little bit insulting, saying that an African American or Hispanic student can't do just as well as a white person if they are given equal opportunity. The current system essentially says this. Truthfully, accepting rewards based on skin color implies that most of these people couldn't make it without help. If I were an underrepresented minority, I would be highly offended by that implication.</p>
<p>Equality of opportunity is what our country is about. It should not be liberalized to try to yield equality of results. We start on an equal playing field, but the game is going to be down for some people, at least some of the time.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>Joey, I tend to agree with you. I think AA probably had its place at one point, but it's worn out its welcome.</p>
<p>Exactly. At one point, it was necessary to level the playing field, just after desegregation, but we've had an African American National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Education. Those people were chosen as the BEST for the job. At this point, with minorities occupying such high positions in society, surely we can't justify making racial distinctions that hurt the majority.</p>
<p>Most Americans are against preferential treatment but believe in helping the disadvantaged. Race is no longer a disadvantage. AA should be out the door already.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>Hispanics and blacks make a high crime area?</p>
<p>There are plenty of poor white areas with low crime.</p>
<p>jprencipe has some sense in him. he is correct. the US has basically stated, in a euphemism, that minorities can not aspire to the greatness to europeans. Now, that is left up to debate, because some can say they will never be. ;)</p>
<p>People should know by now that AA will only create, in the end, one large race war. It's a vital harbinger coming to a town near you.</p>
<p>jprencipe, Powell was helped in the military because we was black. He, by far, is not the best man for the job.</p>
<p>jprencipe, i don't think it is safe to say race is no longer a disadvantage. It certainly is. However, I think that admissions officers at selective colleges are not likely to be the ones to discriminate against minority applicants. If affirmative action were banned at all universities across the country tomorrow, do you think there would be hordes of racist admissions officers trying to keep minorities out? Impossible.</p>