<p>
</p>
<p>…you’ve absolutely ruined any credability with this statement, all Ivies recruit all sports.</p>
<p>How the hell does that even make sense in your mind? Are you saying that the average math score of an African-American at an ivy is no more than 350?? Seriously??</p>
<p>@myraven11…think he means 350pts lower on a 2400 scale</p>
<p>This is for math and reading only (1600), not 2400. The average SAT scores (math and reading) for the Blacks in all Ivies is below 1150, probably around 1100 if the average for Asians is about 1550. The race really makes a huge difference.</p>
<p>akbear: can you point me tothe source of those avg scores? Thx</p>
<h2>Here is the reference: Thomas Espenshade, lexandria Radford, NO LONGER SEPARATE, NOT YET EQUAL: RACE AND CLASS IN ELITE COLLEGE ADMISSION AND CAMPUS LIFE 92 Table 3.5 (2009) (“Espenshade”). A study by a Princeton professor.</h2>
<p>Quote from this: <a href=“http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/pdf/amicus-brief.pdf[/url]”>http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/pdf/amicus-brief.pdf</a>
A. Race Is Heavily Correlated to Prospects for School Admission.
There is little question that a college applicant’s race strongly impacts the odds of admission at many of the Nation’s leading educational institutions. According to one widely-cited, comprehensive study, Asian American students’ SAT scores must exceed their white colleagues’ results by 140 points to gain an equivalent chance of admission at private institutions. The corresponding black and Hispanic SAT advantages
6 relative to whites are 310 and 130 points, respectively. Thomas Espenshade, lexandria Radford, NO LONGER SEPARATE, NOT YET EQUAL: RACE AND CLASS IN ELITE
COLLEGE ADMISSION AND CAMPUS LIFE 92 Table 3.5 (2009) (“Espenshade”). For public institutions, the Asian American disadvantage relative to whites is 3.4 ACT points (out of 36), while the corresponding black and Hispanic advantages are 3.8 and 0.3 points, respectively. Id. “[F]or the same SAT scores, the chances of being admitted are usually highest for black and Hispanic candidates and lowest for Asian applicants. For example, in the highest SAT range (1400-1600), 77 percent of black students are admitted, followed by 48 percent of Hispanics, 40 percent of whites, and 30 percent of Asian candidates.” Id. at 81.
Among enrolled students admitted to UT Austin outside the Top Ten Percent program in 2009, the mean SAT scores (out of 2400) were 1991 for Asians,
1914 for whites, 1794 for Hispanics, and 1524 for blacks, while mean grade point averages for these demographic groups were 3.07, 3.04, 2.83, and 2.57 respectively. Implementation and Results of the Texas Automatic Admissions Law (HB588) at the University of Texas at Austin (December 23, 2010), at 14, Table 7-SAT, available at <a href=“http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report13.pdf[/url]”>http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report13.pdf</a> (last visited
May 23, 2012).
Another study revealed that Asians admitted to the University of Michigan in 2005 scored a median 1400 out of 1600 on the SAT – 50, 140, and 240 points higher than the median scores for white, Hispanic, and black applicants, respectively. lthea K. Nagai, Racial and Ethnic Preferences in Undergraduate Admissions at the University of Michigan, CENTER FOR EQUAL OPPORTUNITY (October 17, 2006), at 1, available at <a href=“http://www.ceousa.org/attachments/article/548/UM_UGRAD_final.pdf[/url]”>http://www.ceousa.org/attachments/article/548/UM_UGRAD_final.pdf</a> (last visited May 21, 2012). While Michigan that year admitted 92 percent of black and 88 percent of Hispanic applicants bearing a 3.2 grade point average and 1240 SAT, only 10 percent
of Asian and 14 percent of white applicants with such numbers were admitted. Id. at 21.
Unsurprisingly, Asian American enrollment rises dramatically when race-conscious admission standards are eliminated. When Californians ratified Calif. Const. art. I, § 31 (“Proposition 209”), barring all invidious racial discrimination in college admissions,
Berkeley saw Asian freshman enrollment rise from 37.3 percent in 1995, to 43.57 percent in 2000, to 46.59 percent by 2005. David R. Colburn, Charles E. Young, and Victor M. Yellen, Admissions and Public Higher Education in California, Texas and Florida:The Post-Affirmative Action Era, 4(1) INTERACTIONS: UCLA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION AND INFORMATION STUDIES (2008), available at [url=<a href=“Admissions and Public Higher Education in California, Texas, and Florida: The Post-Affirmative Action Era”>Admissions and Public Higher Education in California, Texas, and Florida: The Post-Affirmative Action Era]Admissions</a> and Public Higher Education in California, Texas, and Florida: The Post-Affirmative Action Era [eScholarship]<a href=“last%20visited%20May%2020,%202012”>/url</a>. “For UCSD, the number of Asian-American students
continues to increase as both a number and percent of the student body, from 1,070 or 35.93 percent in 1995 to 1,133 or 36.33 percent in 2000 and to 1,684 or 46.88 percent in 2005.” Id. Smaller improvements were also seen in Texas and Florida, which had
eliminated “affirmative action” programs, but replaced them with geographic plans designed to have a disparate impact along racial lines. Id. at 18.
…
Racial disparity in college admission is reflected not only by grades and SAT scores. “Asians comprise about 30 percent of winners and finalists for the most
prestigious accolades given to high school seniors, about double their Ivy League enrollment. For example, of 8,091 students designated as AP National
Scholars in 2006 . . . 2,602, or 32 percent, were Asian American.” Golden at 305.
As Princeton researcher Thomas Espenshade summed, “We’re finding that there’s consistently this Asian penalty.” Golden at 305. “He added that the Asian penalty persists even after preferences for alumni children and recruited athletes are taken into
account – contrary to the claims of Harvard and other elite colleges that [such edges] explain the disparity in credentials between successful white and Asian candidates.” Id.</p>
<p>Okay, can we stop it with these kind of threads? It makes everyone go crazy. The point is, URMs are considered…</p>
<p>I wonder why people can’t look beyond someone’s complexion.</p>
<p>It’s not about complexion. It’s about making a more equitable society.</p>
<p>There’s too much complexity to analyze in a post or two or even a thousand.</p>
<p>I was on a radio show 20 years ago and was asked about AA. I suggested that we go full scale into making AA about K-12 education. If that happened, this argument would be unnecessary.</p>
<p>We can’t continue at those levels as things are and expect progress in college admissions or the workplace hence this same argument 40 years later.</p>