Could my friend get rescinded here?

[silverturtle]

<p>

Colleges now deem people from Spain to be URMs.

</p>

<p>Where did you hear this? To my knowledge, those with Spanish heritage do not benefit from Affirmative Action at most schools.</p>

[Money4Life]

<p>They are classified as hispanic on the common app or they were last year at least. I had a friend who is of Spanish descent who told me that including Spain in this group is fairly new. Though, he called up Penn and they told him that “Penn really values the diversity Spaniards bring to the Penn campus.” Not sure what that means, but it sounds like they are given a benefit in the process there at least. Plus, his heritage enabled him to be a national hispanic scholar.</p>

[silverturtle]

<p>

They are classified as hispanic on the common app or they were last year at least. I had a friend who is of Spanish descent who told me that including Spain in this group is fairly new. Though, he called up Penn and they told him that “Penn really values the diversity Spaniards bring to the Penn campus.” Not sure what that means, but it sounds like they are given a benefit in the process there at least. Plus, his heritage enabled him to be a national hispanic scholar.

</p>

<p>I am aware that by most definitions, those with Spanish heritage are Hispanic. But I have not seen any evidence that they benefit from Affirmative Action and have, moreover, heard affirmation of the idea that they do not from some who are involved in the admissions process (e.g., interviewers and admissions officers).</p>

[Money4Life]

<p>I don’t know if I would trust interviewers. However, I too have spoken with an admissions officer from Wharton regarding what benefits Spaniards receive. She told me that they were deemed white for admissions purposes. She had not been working in admissions for the last three years, though. My friend told me that Spaniards began receiving recognition as “hispanic” last year. He is also extremely wealthy and hired a top admissions counselor (it cost an arm and a leg =/), and she told him that colleges would absolutely give him AA benefits in the admissions process. If I am wrong here, I apologize. I simply assumed that my buddy wasn’t lying to me.</p>

[justadream92]

<p>

The schools knew you were black. Plus, the fact that admissions counselors called it indicates they were not gonna treat you like the standard applicant.

</p>

<p>I don’t recall any of my Black classmates at Stanford getting a phone call. It was probably out of clarification.</p>

<p>

Ok, first of all, I bet that val from your school had done something significant or was involved in sports/band for the school. The black girl got into Harvard, if she was white that admission would have been less than a sure thing. Now it is totally possible that girl would have gotten into Harvard if she was white (assuming her ECs were still good), but being black made a HYPS acceptance inevitable. I also find it very interesting you found all these alleged people at admitted students days as I found NO unhooked people with SAT scores below 2100 at my admitted student days. Though you again didn’t give me anything more to work with on those applicants because you just gave me their race and their scores.

</p>

<p>Val did no sports/band. Heavily involved in Model UN and won Best Delegate at the International Convention in 2007. Also very involved in community service and won several scholarships to go abroad with her church to help out in impoverished communities. Admissions to HYPS is less of a sure thing for ANYONE! It’s misleading to think otherwise just because someone’s a URM. To your last two sentences, yes because you seem to be attacking solely URM qualifications on test scores with statements such as</p>

<p>

An SAT score <1900 is usually /autoreject.

Oh, thats right…they have good averages on the SAT as a whole and thus don’t get any.

However, if you have an sat below a 2000, I would bet alot of money that you would have been rejected from the ivy you got into if you said you were white.

</p>

<p>I’m eluding Race and SAT scores because that’s what you appear to be basing qualifications off of. Sorry for neglecting the other facets of their application because you have also in your vague description of AA admits, who you unknowingly bash while being exempt of the full details of their application.</p>

<p>

The SAT is essentially an IQ test. It tests your vocab (highly correlated with IQ), your reading comprehension, and ability to use basic math principles in often nebulous ways. The writing section is a little less IQ assessing, but that was just recently added by the SAT. But i am interested here, if the SAT doesnt assess your IQ or ability to do well in college, why do all these schools require it be sent to them?

</p>

<p>No. The SAT is not an IQ test. IQ tests IQ levels. The SAT is a test of how quickly you can get through a given set of data and how much you can get correct in comparison to other students who have varied levels of vocab, math principles, exc. They are not essentially the same.
[SAT</a> I: A Faulty Instrument For Predicting College Success | FairTest](<a href=“http://www.fairtest.org/sat-i-faulty-instrument-predicting-college-success]SAT”>SAT I: A Faulty Instrument For Predicting College Success - Fairtest)</p>

<p>

The SAT I is designed to predict first-year college grades - it is not validated to predict grades beyond the freshman year, graduation rates, pursuit of a graduate degree, or for placement or advising purposes. However, according to research done by the tests’ manufacturers, class rank and/or high school grades are still both better predictors of college performance than the SAT I.

</p>

<p>These schools say they require standardized tests in order to “get a general breadth of the applicants in a uniform manner aside from varied fluctuations in GPA,” essentially making the collegeboard richer off of number crazed perfectionists. At the same time, they know that plenty of applicants are just not gifted at taking a standardized test, and that’s why colleges don’t use scores as the sole indicator or likelihood of success in college or admittance, respectively. GPA, as well as strong performance in college-level/AP/IB courses, reflects work ethic, which if applied to any kind of learning environment, outpaces any other kind of predictor. I’m not downplaying the importance, or prediction purposes, of standardized tests. I’m saying that they’re not everything. And that they are simply predictions which can be disproved or proved given the individual’s personal outlook on his/her education.</p>

<p>

I am telling you that the white population has more people to do well in school than the asian population does. For example, say that you have 100 people in a room with 90 people are white and 10 people are asian. Say 8/10 asians are qualified for HYPS. Probability would say that over 8/90 whites will be qualified for HYPS too simply because there are more whites in the room. This example isnt perfect but it conveys the point I was trying to make.

</p>

<p>I’m staunchly positive that there are enough quantitively gifted Asian applicants to Harvard to compensate for about 75% of an entering Freshman class out of a general applicant pool over 30,000. </p>

<p>

Haha, of couse, it all comes back to slavery.

That’s right. This nation was built on slavery.</p>

[silverturtle]

<p>

No. The SAT is not an IQ test. IQ tests IQ levels. The SAT is a test of how quickly you can get through a given set of data and how much you can get correct in comparison to other students who have varied levels of vocab, math principles, exc. They are not essentially the same.

</p>

<p>While the phrasing “The SAT is an IQ test” is objectionable because of its ambiguous intended meaning, SAT scores correlate rather strongly and positively with IQ scores. Also, the SAT correlates about as well with college grades as do high school grades.</p>

[AmbitiousMind07]

<p>Money, in your post (#111), you talk about the girl’s stats as “poor” and “bad” and you also say that she will “wrongfully attend Columbia this fall.” Okay, math is not my forte (so correct me if I’m wrong), but if the middle 50% of ACT scores of admitted students to Columbia is between a 31 and 34, doesn’t that mean that 25% of admits scored above that and 25% of admits scored below that? How can her score be considered “bad” or inadmissible (as you have clearly displayed throughout your rhetoric) if statistically her score of 29 fits the profile?</p>

<p>We may never agree on this topic, but I will continue to offer counter evidence to your presumptuous remarks on this forum. And I find it interesting how you think this discussion to be biased because many people responding and disagreeing with you are URMs. There was a similar thread like this in the law school forum—several gay posters started responding to the hateful anti-gay sentiments another poster started spreading; eventually that poster became extremely defensive and left the discussion because he found it pointless arguing with gay posters on the board. I actually find opposition refreshing—keeps your opinions strong, or maybe enlightens/modifies them for the better.</p>

[justadream92]

<p>

While the phrasing “The SAT is an IQ test” is objectionable because of its ambiguous intended meaning, SAT scores correlate rather strongly and positively with IQ scores. Also, the SAT correlates about as well with college grades as do high school grades.

</p>

<p>Point taken. But of course, there are exemptions that disprove that.</p>

[silverturtle]

<p>

Point taken. But of course, there are exemptions that disprove that.

</p>

<p>No single case can disprove a positive correlation. Certainly, however, the correlation is less than 1 and there are, thus, cases in which the general trend does not manifest.</p>

[Money4Life]

<ol>
<li><p>Umm I would call being the best delegate at the international conference for MUN a HUGE hook. This girl in question didn’t have ANY award of such high caliber. And no, I don’t just attack AA admits. I am just as resentful of legacy applicants/developmental applicants. I don’t have as much of a problem with recruits because they at least did something of merit for their admission to top schools.</p></li>
<li><p>Ok, so the SAT is utilized to account for differences in GPA due to differences in grading at schools. Hopefully we all knew that already, but it just shows that colleges trust the SAT at least somewhat in its ability to determine the relative intellect of their classmates. Plus, have you seen some of those graphs on SAT admission? It shows an exponentional increase in admissions chances at top schools as applicants go from a 2350 to 2400. Mifune brilliantly determined that no other real cause for this increase existed other than an increase in your SAT. Again, this test is VERY IMPORTANT.</p></li>
<li><p>Well, I don’t know if I agree that 75% of the HYPS classes could be filled with Asians, but w/e. I also think that 100% of the classes at HYPS could be filled by white applicants, and they were for many years. Whats your point? If its that Whites get affirmative action benefits at these schools, I say your crazy. But even if we did, I would fight against it and demand that no one be able to disclose their race in their application.</p></li>
<li><p>The south was built on slavery. You could make an argument that much of northern industry was built on slavery, but I would argue it played a much lesser role there. The point is American isn’t racist anymore. We have a black president. Give benefits to the poor blacks and whites, but the wealthy don’t need the benefits anymore.</p></li>
</ol>

[justadream92]

<p>Apologies for using ‘disprove.’ Perhaps “deviate from the positive correlation” is better diction?</p>

[AmbitiousMind07]

<p>I was always under the impression that underrepresented hispanics in university admissions were Puerto Ricans and Mexicans.</p>

[Money4Life]

<p>ambitiousmind:</p>

<p>I love the 25/75 percentile argument. A former Penn admissions rep would on this forum constantly tell hookless applicants that they needed to be in the 75 percentile to have a reasonable shot at Penn because the lower 25 percentile is filled with hooked applicants.</p>

[silverturtle]

<p>

And no, I don’t just attack AA admits. I am just as resentful of legacy applicants/developmental applicants. I don’t have as much of a problem with recruits because they at least did something of merit for their admission to top schools.

</p>

<p>There is a fundamental problem in attacking people who benefit from practices that you deem inappropriate instead of, more rationally, criticizing the practices themselves. The latter is perfectly acceptable if done respectfully; the former is reprehensible.</p>

<p>

Perhaps “deviate from the positive correlation” is better diction?

</p>

<p>Yes, I have no problem with that phrase. I think that we can agree that the SAT positively correlates with IQ and, in turn, intelligence (whatever you consider that to be). Is the correlation strong enough for us to make individual judgments of relative intelligence based on small score differences? Probably not.</p>

<p>

I was always under the impression that underrepresented hispanics in university admissions were Puerto Ricans and Mexicans.

</p>

<p>I too.</p>

[AmbitiousMind07]

<p>^I can believe that (in reference to Money’s post). However, what ever numbers constitute that bottom 25% were deemed admissible, correct? My qualm is that you’ve consistently insulted those with lower stats outside of the middle 50% calling the scores “bad” and “poor”.</p>

<p>And I LOLed at “America isn’t racist anymore.”</p>

<p>You remind me of a good friend from high school Money4Life; we were really tight, but disagreed on so many levels.</p>

[silverturtle]

<p>

And I LOLed at “America isn’t racist anymore.”

</p>

<p>Yes, that is a deeply ignorant statement.</p>

[Money4Life]

<p>Why is it reprehensible? I don’t see any reason why we cannot state the obvious in these matters. I mean I don’t support just going up to random people in the street and telling them “your are an AA admit” out of the blue. But, if you put yourself out there, why can you not have your resume attacked?</p>

[Money4Life]

<p>America isn’t a racist anymore. There are segments of the population that are racist, but society is not longer centered upon racism. Well, unless you deem affirmative action practices to be racist. Then yes, we are a racist country. However, you are not turned away from jobs because you are black. So, why don’t you explain to me why that statement is so darn ignorant.</p>

[justadream92]

<p>

1. Umm I would call being the best delegate at the international conference for MUN a HUGE hook. This girl in question didn’t have ANY award of such high caliber. And no, I don’t just attack AA admits. I am just as resentful of legacy applicants/developmental applicants. I don’t have as much of a problem with recruits because they at least did something of merit for their admission to top schools.

</p>

<p>Honestly, considering the competitive climate at these elite schools, who doesn’t have a hook of some sort to make you stand out from Joe and Sue when applying to elite schools? Something of merit? Athleticism is merit? Colleges are about making money, while of course, educating their students. They educate their students to become rich and famous so that they can contribute to their endowments. (sarcasm) Truthfully though, elite schools are looking for game changers who will go out and do amazing things in the world and contribute to society with their names under their belts. Of course, adcoms want to see what they can provide to the student, but they’re also considering what the student can provide to the school in the future. </p>

<p>

2. Ok, so the SAT is utilized to account for differences in GPA due to differences in grading at schools. Hopefully we all knew that already, but it just shows that colleges trust the SAT at least somewhat in its ability to determine the relative intellect of their classmates. Plus, have you seen some of those graphs on SAT admission? It shows an exponentional increase in admissions chances at top schools as applicants go from a 2350 to 2400. Mifune brilliantly determined that no other real cause for this increase existed other than an increase in your SAT. Again, this test is VERY IMPORTANT.

</p>

<p>I never said it wasn’t important. What I said was that it’s not everything and not the sole indicator of admission.</p>

<p>

3. Well, I don’t know if I agree that 75% of the HYPS classes could be filled with Asians, but w/e. I also think that 100% of the classes at HYPS could be filled by white applicants, and they were for many years. Whats your point? If its that Whites get affirmative action benefits at these schools, I say your crazy. But even if we did, I would fight against it and demand that no one be able to disclose their race in their application.

</p>

<p>[Who</a> benefits most from affirmative action? | Jet | Find Articles at BNET](<a href=“http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n19_v87/ai_16717080/]Who”>http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n19_v87/ai_16717080/)</p>

<p>[Focus</a> on Affirmative Action](<a href=“http://aapf.org/focus/episodes/oct30.php]Focus”>http://aapf.org/focus/episodes/oct30.php)</p>

<p>

4. The south was built on slavery. You could make an argument that much of northern industry was built on slavery, but I would argue it played a much lesser role there. The point is American isn’t racist anymore. We have a black president. Give benefits to the poor blacks and whites, but the wealthy don’t need the benefits anymore.

</p>

<p>You clearly have no knowledge of American History, nor are you aware of current events.</p>

[Money4Life]

<p>I called a 29 a bad score btw. A 29 is below the bottom 25% at Columbia. So, yes it is a bad score. Moreover, numbers matter a little more to you when you thought that you could employ those percentiles to prove your point, ambitious.</p>