I keep hearing that being Indian will give me great difficulties when trying to apply to the Ivy League… Is this true? 0.0
Yes. Being an ORM(over represented minority) will hurt your chances. Look at the average ACT/SAT scores at the schools by race and it is pretty obvious there is a gap between blacks whites and asians.
@MandarinSin that is only based upon SAT scores- how about admissions trends in general? Are certain races such as asians really discriminated against?
I just used SAT scores as an example. Basically to answer your last question, yes. They expect much higher standards from asians than they do blacks. It absolutely sucks but that’s just how it goes.
Yes.
“Look at the average ACT/SAT scores at the schools by race and it is pretty obvious there is a gap between blacks whites and asians.”
Where can you find these stats?
@skieurope @MandarinSin so imagine a caucasian person had a 50% chance of a certain school- what would be the asian/indian’s chance?
@CrossTFTW Could you at least google it first? http://features.thecrimson.com/2013/frosh-survey/admissions.html
200 point difference between blacks and asians.
@whodajaguar there’s no ratio for that. All factors are considered in admission. It just happens that asians are held to a higher standard.
Simple answer: Yes
Well being Indian in and of itself doesn’t automatically exclude you. It just means more will be expected of you. If you are first generation college, raised in poverty, or have other extenuating circumstances then being Indian won’t hurt. Otherwise just be prepared to excel.
No, not at all. In fact, compared to representation in the general population, asians (including Indians) are represented disproportionately in greater numbers in the Ivy’s. Therefore, as an Indian, you have a greater percentage chance, when measured against other asians, of being admitted than does a Caucasian, when measured against other Caucasians, or a black person, when measured against other blacks.
However, since there are so many more asian applicants, your portfolio of achievements will need to be significantly better than average in order to be admitted, because you are in essence competing against a larger and better prepared (on average) pool of other asian applicants.
That’s because asians are disproportionately represented in the applicant pool.
Being Indian will hurt your chance of admission, because when the AdComm reads your essay, ECs, recs, academic stats, your pkg will be measured against other asian applicants for a fixed quota of asian slots.
Consider the following:
1)It’s illogical to be an ORM and claim discrimination.
2)The SAT has been rendered unreliable due to cheating, over preparation and multiple testing attempts.
3)High Asian SAT scores are likely inflated due to Foreign Asian scores.
4)Assuming the SAT is reliable, the difference between a 2300 and 2100 score is statistically meaningless as a indicator of success, since the difference is likely only that of around 6-8 questions. Such a small difference predicts nothing. A far better predictor is likely the ability to captain a sport or speak several languages. Hence the need for a Holistic process.
5)Lastly to save face, it appears many blame the admission process instead of owning up to a lack of credentials.
Percentage asian-americans at Ivies is higher than their proportion of US population, bcs a high number of them apply. But their ADMIT RATE is lower than that of other groups because the Ivies put a ceiling on the percentage.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/12/19/fears-of-an-asian-quota-in-the-ivy-league/statistics-indicate-an-ivy-league-asian-quota
So why do all the ivies mandate SAT scores if the scores are utterly useless?
Int’l are a separate pool. But SamRam thinks anyone w an asian face is a foreigner.
If you’ve taken the SAT more than once, u will know there is a world of difference in being able to achieve a 2100 v a 2300 score.
At my kid’s school, the athletic teams all have several captains so lots of seniors can jot it down in their college app.
“Holistic” gives the schools the opacity to discriminate at will.
It’s not lack of credentials but requirement of higher credentials (as compared to other demographic groups) that is the issue.
@GMTplus7 Your last point is very odd. Your credentials are compared to your peers. It doesn’t matter if you think having a 3.5 GPA is great, compared to a 4, it’s not. You’re lacking the credentials comparatively. Sure, that 3.5 might let you go free to community college but in no way is it good compared to your peers when apply to top 20 universities. It’s all relative and with the rise of the common app, everyone applies to everywhere they “might possibly” want to go.
@MandarinSin, the point @GMTplus7 is making is that the average asian admitted student will need a better credential portfolio than the average admitted student.
My last point about higher credentials is that the OP will be required to have even higher test scores, ECs, essay, etc, compared to other racial groups, to have the equivalent chance of being admitted vs other racial groups.
It just baffles me that some people look for the unlikely answer instead of the most obvious:
1)The obvious answer: Every race is in fact capped, since every race has far more applicants than seats available. Since Asians are ORM, the cap on them must be considered loser not tighter.
2)The obvious answer: If Asians are not being accepted at the same proportional rate as in 1993 then the pool applicants is either not as good and/or the pool of applicants from the other races has improved credentials.
3)The obvious answer: If the SAT is no longer a reliable measurement, it cannot be used as a tool to argue discrimination.
4)The obvious answer: To ignore the obvious and concentrate only on the unobvious is not scientific. Why are Asians ignoring the obvious?