<p>Nice post, JHS (#159). Insightful and eloquently stated, imo.</p>
<p>If you read the whole article rather than just the first line of the abstract, you would realize that the article was not talking specifically about admissions. It was talking about the issue in a general societal science, I merely mentioned it here as a useful background perspective.</p>
<p>
In the world of admissions, has there ever be a more disingenuous attempt to present unverifiable facts as pure axioms? All we have is sketchy anedoctal "evidence" and gross generalizations!
No one has tried to pass off any sort of accusations as "pure axioms." This was supposed to be a simple discussion of the issue to decide if there was a problem and if so, what to do about it. And if you are looking for evidence to the contrary, look at the very first lines of the OP's article. </p>
<p>Rachel, for an Asian, has many friends.</p>
<p>Sure there is no formalized race-based discrimination, but to deny that race is no longer an issue in America is foolish.</p>
<p>
In this thread, we have been talking about discrimination. How about talking about fairness and ... generosity. Is there another country in the world that is making such an effort to accept immigrants and offer them such an education? Is there any other country where PRIVATE schools have made deliberate changes to treat everyone fairly.
Sure this is true, but that doesn't mean we can't still be striving for even greater improvement.</p>
<p>I find your defense of the legacy system astounding though. America as a country was built on and idealized social mobility, that people at birth would have equal opportunity. It was NOT a system designed to allow a group of families to consistently remain rich and powerful.</p>
<p>A bit of a tongue-in-cheek article in the UCLA Daily Bruin on the subject - </p>
<p>
[quote]
Over a hundred students gathered in Meyerhoff Park last week to express discontent with the University of California admissions policy.</p>
<p>Protestors chanted such slogans as, "UC Regents, I see racists," and criticized UCLA for not doing enough to increase diversity.</p>
<p>But they missed the point entirely.</p>
<p>Why focus on the "racist" UC Board of Regents? Why go after something so cliche as "The Man"?</p>
<p>If you're going to blame anyone, I say we blame the Asians.
...(more)...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Phatalbert, with all due respect, there is a reason why publishers offer an ABSTRACT, of which the first lines are typically the most important. So forgive me, for declining to read an entire article that starts with a remarkably unfounded proposition. The author had a cjoice, and his was to base his arguments on faulty assumptions. </p>
<p>Further, feel free to find my defense of legacies foolish. For the record, I am not a legacy --at least not at a school that recognizes them. So, do not believe I am defending a group of people out of self-interest or self-preservation. I am, however, happy to recognize how the school that have been so coveted have been built, and also recognize who are the givers and who are the ... takers. </p>
<p>Our country is indeed built on a system that is not designed to allow a group of families to consistently remain rich and powerful. A fact that has been well understood by our wealthiest private institutions. Do you have the pretension to advance that the schools "most favored" by applicants have failed to offer a substantial contribution to upwards mobility? Have they maintained an oppressing hegemony of white legacies? For what is worth a stroll through Cambridge, or Palo Alto would seem to clearly debunk the mythical overpowering value of being a legacy --not to mention one at Berkeley or any other UC system school. </p>
<p>Indeed that doesn't mean we can't still be striving for even greater improvement. But, is there a universal definition of improvement? My definition of improvement would be based on seeing the student body at our leading schools to be a LOT more aligned to our population distribution. This would mean that the access to higher education has finally emerged from its abject current stage. </p>
<p>Yes, my version of improvement would be drastically different than the whining one that is so often repeated on these boards. And whining IT IS!</p>
<p>JHS, that was a great perspective. Finally, someone noted the historical/societal impacts upon achievement and "assimilation."</p>
<p>Concur, JHS, nice post.</p>
<p>I find this thread a little ironic in its criticism for some asian families who encourage their children to attend schools that are better known in their home countries when the OP had a great deal at U Mich honors but chose to have her mother go into extensive debt ( over $29,000 each year in loans according to OP) so that she could attend a more prestigious school ( Northwestern)</p>
<p>@xiggi.</p>
<p>Yes there is an abstract and yes the purpose is to summarize, however I dearly wish that you had not been so offended by the "remarkably unfounded proposition" that you would not even finish the first paragraph of the abstract. If you had done so you would realize that I did not offer the article as a direct argument in this thread, nor as a direct commentary on the state of admissions. </p>
<p>I posted it as background information on the way the asian america has been dealing with race issues in GENERAL. among other things the japanese internment and Korematsu decision in the supreme court.</p>
<p>I believe you misinterpreted the abstract of the article, believing it to say that there is proven discrimination against asian americans in admissions, which is not proven and would make the article quite absurd. However the article speaks to racism against asian americans in general. If you contend that that also does not exist I think we need to start a new thread and thoroughly discuss this. Just for starters there is a long history of racism against asians. Starting with the Chinese Exclusion Act, to Korematsu, to the Vincent Chin case in Detroit more recently, and even more recently the case of an asian american couple at University of Michigan being urinated upon by other students. These are just a few that are the most well known to me.</p>
<p>To your other point about legacy admissions. Please don't be offended by anything I said, I in no way tried to imply that you were acting out of self-interest as a legacy. If I had said that I would have found it understandable you hold those views rather than astounding. Let me say that I greatly respect you and have been very impressed by your many other posts on this forum.
My definition of improvement would be based on seeing the student body at our leading schools to be a LOT more aligned to our population distribution. This would mean that the access to higher education has finally emerged from its abject current stage.
Why do you think higher education is currently in an abject state? From being in college now I certainly don't see that.
Also, I agree with you that ideally the student body distribution at schools should be a lot more aligned to our population distribution. But this shouldn't be accomplished through changing admissions policies. Affirmative action is such a stopgap measure only. It wouldn't be necessary, and indeed any consideration of race would be unnecessary for admissions, if only we could fix our secondary school systems, and the problems of urban poverty and decline that have placed so many minorities in positions from which it is near impossible for them to succeed or compete.</p>
<p>xiggi, I'm really surprised that we ended up on opposite sides of the debate because by and large I agree with you. I doubt that there is any racism against asians in admissions, and if there is any it is because of isolated individuals who have internalized stereotypes.</p>
<p>I'll have to concur that there is a lot more racism aimed at Asian-Americans that we realize. My sil (who is half-Japanese) has stories that would make your hair curl. She's been called every name in the book - and to me she barely looks Asian.</p>
<p>Phatalbert, I take good note of the points you raised in your very eloquent post. I apologize for having taken a dismissive attitude regarding the article you quoted. I realize I was still irritated by the callous example of Golden. </p>
<p>Thank you for your courtesy.</p>
<p>JHS, Very well said. Let me do make a point regarding a fundamental difference to the example you so warmly alluded to. Immigrants from the Old World and their descendents can quickly “assimilate”, whereas those from Asia find it more difficult because we look distinctly different from what is perceived as “American”. For this reason, the problems that we face are more akin to those seen in gender issues rather than outright discrimination. There are ongoing discussions now concerning the burden placed on college admission by the imbalance in the gender of qualified applicants to our elite colleges. This is a problem that we all agree that is difficult but demands a solution or a good compromise. To suggest that asian American parents should beef up their kids to be linebackers may be funny to some but to others may sound no different than suggesting sex change as a solution to the gender gap problem in college admission. Like gender issues, the issues on college admission of asian Americans are complex. But unlike gender gap which generates serious discussions, asian american issues are being treated with “football humor”, asian parent bashing in the original post, or dismissed by the circular argument that those who are not admitted obviously don’t belong. Would posters like Xiggi demand irrefutable evidence that female applicants are at a disadvantage before they would consent to a meaningful discussion? Won’t we be horrified if an admission dean makes a statement such as this female applicant looks just like 1000 other female applicants? </p>
<p>Having said all that, I do appreciate very much what you said and agree with you by and large. However, I do think that asian american issues, like gender issues a few years back, are not well served by the approach of- "it will change with time".</p>
<p>
[quote]
How about talking about fairness and ... generosity. Is there another country in the world that is making such an effort to accept immigrants and offer them such an education? Is there any other country where PRIVATE schools have made deliberate changes to treat everyone fairly.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>xiggi is correct. America's generosity is remarkable and unprecidented in history.</p>
<p>America's generosity has also fueled our economic engine. While America has been unusual in its open door policies, and has benefited from them with high-talent individuals from all over the world choosing to make their homes here, the sheer numbers of people who look different from eachother and speak differently from eachother mean that we have suffered more open from racism on an-ongoing basis than other highly industrialized countries. It is our responsibility to continue to work to allow anyone who enters our country to have the chance to succeed equally according to their ability. And to continue to try to eradicate prejudice.</p>
<p>It's our obligation, IMO, given the enormous resources we command.</p>
<p>I'm not always sure what others mean by assimilation, but in my view it has nothing to do with appearances and everything to do with an embracing of core values of a culture --not superficial values (for example, commercialism), but things like: opportunity, inclusion, democracy, & free enterprise.</p>
<p>If I went to Japan, I wouldn't need to show assimilation by indulging in the seedier aspects of Tokyo night life (or anything else associated with appearance & surface), but I'd be in big trouble if I didn't ACCEPT that this is a culture built on respect and built on tradition & a certain social structure. If I just paid lip service to that and kept saying "but, but, but" when things didn't go according to the more informal American expectations, I'd spin a lot of wheels thrashing about -- not to mention offending the native Japanese in the process. But mainly, I would be fighting a losing battle & wasting a lot of words & energy trying to change THEM to be like me.</p>
<p>I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but I need to be honest & say that I see way too many Asian <em>parents</em> trying to change American (college admissions) culture to reflect Chinese, Japanese, Korean values. Probably these are mainly immigrant parents, perhaps fairly recent immigrants. But either they are not helping themselves to make the adjustment to full acceptance, or Americans are not helping them enough to show them important differences, while still understanding & acknowledging their own cultural norms. I see so many examples of this in my own personal life, not to mention on CC.</p>
<p>This may not pertain to the Asian posters on this particular thread, such as redstar, etc., but when people say, "but,but,but" --no matter how you explain what a different SYSTEM it is, fundamentally, then I think no genuine effort is being made to assimilate -- or no one is explaining to them what the fundamental differences are. And please don't flame me because I do not mean this in a mean-spirited way. I just see such a repetition of the same frustration, over & over.</p>
<p>"asian american issues are being treated with “football humor”, </p>
<p>I do not know why you think I was joking. I tried to make very clear that I wasn't. A VERY FEW (and we are really talking about no more than 15-20 private colleges here) have made very clear what their admissions priorities are. If you can't get in as a legacy, developmental admit, desired URM, Pell Grantee, son of an important ambassador, senator, or congressman, published novelist, or owner of a major patent, you have to compete for the remaining places with everyone else, of whatever race. You won't get many points for being a violinist. You WILL get many points if you can bulk up. It's that simple, true, and not particularly humorous, and there are plenty of non-Asian students who do just that.</p>
<p>The reality (from the little data I've seen) is that, take away the above plus the athletes, "Asian-American" (with all the usual caveats for the term) students are overrepresented, in some cases WAY overrepresented in the remainder of the student body. The thing is, however, the remainder may not be all that large. </p>
<p>I don't think admissions to a handful of private colleges says much about America or Americans one way or another (other than the desire to follow the lead of the rich and the very rich a la Veblen's Theory of the Leisure Class), and if they vanished from the face of the earth, very few would even notice.</p>
<p>mini, while someone could theoretically decide to become a football player merely to get into an ivy league college, few would do this, or think ahead far enough to actually do your bulk up plan. I doubt many if any of the recruited athletes at ivy schools had decided to become athletes for admissions reasons.</p>
<p>
I don't think admissions to a handful of private colleges says much about America or Americans one way or another, and if they vanished from the face of the earth, very few would even notice.
Don't undersell these schools.</p>
<p>I'm not underselling them - I ATTENDED them. Other than the folks (especially the well-heeled folks) who attend them, they are almost irrelevant to the educational life of the nation.</p>
<p>As for planning to bulk up for admissions reasons, well, lots of folks do all kinds of ECs for admisisons reasons. Not in the least bit uncommon. But it's a choice, not that I think it makes a heck of a lot of difference. It is no great national tragedy when an "Asian-American" student ends up attending UCLA rather than Princeton, or Berkeley rather than Dartmouth.</p>
<p>mini -- I thought your bulk up comment was funny, and good humor usually has a basis in truth. I disagree that admissions to a handfull of private colleges doesn't say much about America or Americans. Simply because the Ivy designation is an American icon, synonomous with achievement. Recent immigrants getting admitted, or dirt poor Appalachians, or whatever non-traditional group you can name, does say quite a bit. </p>
<p>Alum -- I think the chance to succeed should be available to anyone with the desire to work for it, not on ability. Work ethic will trump talent every time. </p>
<p>epiphany -- "but, but but" EXACTLY! You summed it up perfectly.</p>
<p>Ability includes the desire to work.</p>
<p>Of course there is an entire other thread on who deserves what just for being a human being, what is the baseline we as a society owe everyone.</p>
<p>But that's another discussion. I feel strongly that I am right about racisim and prejudice. I do not feel so strongly about economic policy. But that's just me.</p>
<p>Mind you there are a lot of us WASP-y Americans who are also sputtering (at least occasionally) "but, but, but" at what our society values!</p>