Take Vanderbilt and Notre Dame that have 4-5% Asian.
Now take Duke, Penn, and Northwestern that have about 13-18% Asian. Pretty high in respect to other top universities.
Now, as a Vanderbilt admissions officer, they would tend to diversify their more school and perhaps give a slight hook to Asians. But if you look at Duke, Penn, Nwestern, since they accept a decent-high percentage of Asians each year, would this also mean that they accept more Asians and that this may be a better shot for them.
I am just curious as to which schools will favor or choose Asians more than the other? Personally, I am asianindian
<p>vandy DOES treat asians as URMs. ive heard of asians receiving URM invitations from there.</p>
<p>they aim to have the same demographic as the entire country, so schools that have a lower percentage want more asians. schools with higher, want less.</p>
<p>No becuase Duke gets many Asian applicants as do most very top colleges. The small percentage at the Vandys and ND are brcause not many Asians are interested in those schools and few apply.</p>
<p>I have no idea where you could get this specific information but if you could, you should compare the number of asian applicants to the number of accepted asian applicants.</p>
<p>Asians are a URM at some colleges, an OVER-represented minority at other colleges, and a properly-represented minority at other colleges. Vandy is a Southern school and Notre Dame has a student body that largely comes from catholic high schools. At those schools, you would be a URM. In the UC school system, you would be a over-represented minority and this could hurt you. At Duke, UPenn and Northwestern; you would not be treated special (just like the whites).</p>
<p>This is a problem common to blacks and hispanics, but you might think about whether or not you would be happy/comfortable at a college where you are a URM.</p>
<p>AnOnymOu5: Thank you for mentioning that. I have wondered how UC schools could possibly have such high percentages for asians. I guess that's why we have AA, though. If whites had that kind of over-representation in the Ivies, the politicians and media would be going nuts.</p>
<p>personally, i think we should switch to economically-based affirmative action. it would achieved the cultural diversity desired, and not be hypocritical about race equality.</p>
<p>I agree, but there is not politically motivated reason for that to happen. The economically-disadvantaged do not have special interest groups or lobbyists operating in Congress. All the minority special interest groups really care about is a head count of accepted applicants for their particular race.</p>
<p>@ An0nym0u5: The problem with that is, today, the net worth of the average white family is eight times as much compared to the averaged black family, and white net worth is more than two times greater than black net worth. I'm not saying economically-based AA won't work, but it's something to take into consideration when running for president :-P.</p>
<p>ramjag: I don't see why socioeconomic AA would not work based on what you said. The goal is to help the economically disadvantaged. Basing it on money instead of skin color would just eliminate the oddities such as a rich black student from a prep school having an advantage at HYPSM, and the poor white kid with alcoholic parents not having a chance.</p>
<p>I think you have to determine the school w low AZNs population are that way because few AZNs apply to them before you can make any comparison. A school like Notre Dame draws few AZNs because of its catholic Irish tradition. In this instance, the chances actually favors AZN applicants who do decide to apply. IMHO.</p>
<p>You could probably argue the other case. A school with already high AZN presentation would make AZN applicants compete at disadvantage, against other AZN candidates.</p>