<p>Just a random paranoid question.</p>
<p>um...i believe that at almost all schools asians are overrepresented...</p>
<p>so there wouldn't be any difference in considering a white person and an asian?</p>
<p>What does "overrepresented" mean? Is that good or bad for us/me?</p>
<p>The way I interpret "overrepresented" is that the percentage belonging to a demographic group at a college is higher than the percentage of the demographic group in society. This seems to be a common definition. If we use it, there is no question that Asians are overrepresented (15-20% in colleges, 3-4% overall).</p>
<p>@specify: nope, most college admissions officers give no special considerations for asians/indians, and whites</p>
<p>Compucomp has it right...thats also how i interpret overrepresented...</p>
<p>They may be "overrepresented" but that doesn't mean it'll necessarily hurt TOO much, but you'll end up competing with other asians. But instead the URM get benefits, while this will DEFINITELY not benefit you.</p>
<p>Actually,</p>
<p>Asians aren't the most overrepresented group in top colleges</p>
<p>I heard Jews are even higher when you compare % national population and % in top schools</p>
<p>in most top national universities asians get no special preference the way URMs do... however if you look at some of the top ranked LACs you will likely find some where asians are URMs... atleast i'm guessing you will</p>
<p>Although it's not directly on point, you might be interested in this article: <a href="http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/06/21/affirm%5B/url%5D">http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/06/21/affirm</a>. Here's an excerpt:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The article about Asian Americans comes amid many reports that they are the group that most benefits from the elimination of affirmative action. That supposition is important for several reasons, both practical and political. On a practical level, it counters the idea that colleges will be all white in a post-affirmative action era. Politically, these projections have been used repeatedly by critics of affirmative action, arguing that they are not anti-minority and to appeal for Asian support in referendums. One of the most dramatic studies on this issue came last year, when two Princeton University researchers analyzed data from elite colleges and projected that, without affirmative action, four of every five slots lost by black and Latino students would go to Asian Americans.</p>
<p>In Negative Action Versus Affirmative Action: Asian Pacific Americans Are Still Caught in the Crossfire, William C. Kidder takes issue with the Princeton study and similar findings by other scholars. Its not that the demographic shift seen by the Princeton researchers wouldnt take place in an admissions system thats truly race-neutral, says Kidder, a senior policy analyst at the University of California at Davis. Rather, its the question of why those slots would go to Asian applicants.</p>
<p>The reason, he says, isnt the elimination of affirmative action, but the widespread use of negative action, under which colleges appear to hold Asian American applicants to higher standards than they hold other applicants.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'd say it'd also depend on what school you're looking at. At a college away from the metropolitan areas... Asians would still be a minority.</p>
<p>Would it still count if you're half-asian and half-white? Does it count doubly against you?</p>
<p>I'm kind of just kidding. But I'm also kind of curious.</p>
<p>Attached is the Kidder article:</p>
<p>No where in the article does Kidder specifically state that </p>
<p>
[quote]
The reason, he says, isnt the elimination of affirmative action, but the widespread use of negative action, under which colleges appear to hold Asian American applicants to higher standards than they hold other applicants.
[/quote]
</p>