<p>I got a 2340 on my SAT (not perfect…but still good scores) and was the val of my class. I am resentful of AA and was resent of AA before college admissions were out.</p>
<p>AA bothers me because I spent almost every hour of my life outside of school studying for my SAT, doing ECs, and getting A’s. Then, I look over and see students with lower everything than me get into the same schools I did. I can understand colleges giving perks to poor URMS, but I know an aweful lot of wealthy URMs that got boosts from AA and got into these top schools with significantly worse resumes than me.</p>
<p>Overmyhead: And by arguing the fact that America isn’t a racist place, you’re sugarcoating and trying to cover up what is really going on as well. It goes both ways.</p>
<p>You continue to ignore the countless counter arguments supplied in this thread and not willing to believe some of the other bitterness and injustice other posters are telling you they face everyday. Now who’s sugarcoating and downplaying what?</p>
<p>^^^
Ambitious:</p>
<p>I have read most of this thread (I didn’t read some of the earlier posts…but I have read everything posted over the last 2 days) and to be honest, I haven’t seen many counter arguments that have not already been addressed. You mentioned some discrimination thing that was on 20/20. Well, colleges are turning away white/asian students and replacing them with URMs (many of whom are wealthy). I honestly don’t see much of a difference between the AA and that example you cited.</p>
<p>Rtgrove, I feel you. But I can only speak for myself, in regards to socioeconomic status having to do with a given spectrum of accomplishments. If you looked through my resume and my background, you would be surprised to see that I came from where I came from and still managed to do what I did; not to toot my own horn out of modesty, but there are a lot of students in my Stanford class who didn’t do nearly as much as I did.</p>
<p>We don’t know much about the girl besides what the OP has posted, which can arguably be biased. You have to take that information with a grain of salt, in regards to the facts of her application. At the end of the day, colleges are trying to form a class of students and some students are accepted for reasons that outsiders will not understand.</p>
<p>^^^
I am aware of that justadream. Obviously, you totally deserve to be at Stanford. Though, I think some URMs who are in the upperclass and most legacy applicants simply don’t deserve some of the perks in admissions they receive. I am obviously 100% for socioeconomic affirmative action.</p>
<p>Understandable Rt.</p>
<p>Thanks justadream, best of luck at Stanford this fall!</p>
<p>You as well at Penn, Rt! =]</p>
<p>@overmyhead, I meant anything allowed. Checking one’s race is allowed. </p>
<p>@nosike, hmmm you’re right. My point still applies to all applicants with excellent stats that are not in the top 10% for some random reason. </p>
<p>@rtgrove, I never said Princeton was a better school than Columbia, both of which I regard very highly. I said that the OP’s friend did better in admissions, which is true. Princeton accepts less people than Columbia (7% vs. 10%, both are highly selective). You misread my post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Isn’t Princeton at 8% and Columbia at 9%? I could be misrecalling, though.</p>
<p>Acceptance rate doesnt tell all. Caltech has an acceptance rate in the high teens or low twenties…student body is just highly self selected.</p>
<p>^The point is while both are highly selective, Princeton is more so. Also, in terms of “lay prestige”, Princeton has more. Even though I personally like Columbia better, getting into Princeton is statistically harder. Ergo, the OP’s friend did better without URM status in the college admissions game. </p>
<p>I never said Princeton was overall a better school. Both are fantastic. Both are great achievements to get in to. Both have amazing academics.</p>
<p>EDIT to rtgrove: that situation does not apply to Princeton and Columbia. Both have large numbers of applicants. You seem to think I said Princeton was better than Columbia. Actually, I just said the OP’s friend did better in college admissions because it is statistically harder to get into Princeton than Columbia, and he did it without URM status. Hence, in my opinion, while she did extremely well, he did slightly better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As Rtgrove123 pointed out, acceptance rates do not imply which school is harder to get into. It is generally accepted, however, that Princeton is more selective than Columbia.</p>
<p>^Exactly my point. Both are extremely selective, Princeton arguably slightly more so.</p>
<p>fair enough, circular.</p>
<p>OK. I just want everyone to know what I’m saying. People, including me, can be extremely un-clear on these forums at times. Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough.</p>
<p>“I spent almost every hour of my life outside of school studying for my SAT, doing ECs, and getting A’s.”</p>
<p>So that (with extraordinary sat scores) is the measure of “qualified”.</p>
<p>Shrinkrap, I did the same thing with unextraordinary SAT scores, but extraordinary extracurriculars and recognitions while simutaneously working two jobs to provide for my family. Was I not qualified?</p>
<p>That was sort of a question, but I didn’t really want a response. I really don’t want to get into the whole SAT thing. There’s plenty of that in the Race FAQ. Just seems sort of sad to me, like some sort of arms war.</p>
<p>But I am 51 years old. It’s not “my time”.</p>
<p>Sorry for misunderstanding your rhetoric.</p>