<p>like does brown admissions try to get a bit form every country and nationality or is brown blind to any ethnic factors i wanted to know how much difference someones ethnicity would make when it came to admissions</p>
<p>Ethnicity is considered in most universities/colleges, but it's not as huge a factor as some people make it out to be. Sure, being a minority helps, but it's not going to make up for bad grades, low GPA, or anything like that. It's just a little plus.</p>
<p>My interviewer said that he doesn't think Brown has quotas.</p>
<p>I do not believe any of these schools have "quotas". What they do is that they try to build up a a mosaic with the different applicants. Can u imagine if they would take excusively the highest ranking students.? For instance, most asians like H..so picture the H class... ( all asian girls who play the piano..)Not quiet the variety they try to go for. So..they will take people from different ethnicities, different accomplishments and some of those may have lower grades. It makes it part of the gamble in getting accepted. If a particular year they are short of a white, jock with some interest in art..then a more medicocre student with this profile may get in.</p>
<p>Personally, I believe that philosophy sucks. Universities should value more the academic credentials....and if the top applicants are from Belize, then so be it.</p>
<p>It's against the law to have actually quotas but not against the law to actually take into account diversity.</p>
<p>As for the above statement about top applicants from whatever, I direct you to this excerpt from a paper I wrote discussing the issue of, "Access", one of the main issues universities today are faced with.
[quote]
Access
If the university is to be the medium through which social mobility in American is achieved, then perhaps the most pressing issue on American campuses is access. Programs such as federal aid for the financially disadvantaged and Affirmative Action for underrepresented races has done much to transform the student body at America’s elite academic institutions. However equal opportunity for America’s talented young minds still is a long way off. College-aged individuals from the richest families in America still attend post-secondary institutions at significantly higher rates than those from less fortunate economic backgrounds.<br>
Debate rages in the popular press as to whether under qualified students are being favored due to their race, viewing Affirmative Action as a form of unwarranted favoritism doing more to harm the university and its students than good. Despite this popular debate, it is the general opinion of the university (and this writer) that there is value to be gained for all students by increasing the diversity on American campuses. Lyndon B. Johnson perhaps said it best at Howard University in 1965, “"You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line in a race and then say, 'you are free to compete with all the others', and still justly believe that you have been completely fair."i<br>
The extent to which racial inequality exists in today’s society still requires some form of special consideration in order to ensure access for all American’s to our best education facilities. It is unclear if race is still the main factor limiting the ability for bright, young, minority minds to succeed on standardized exams and in our secondary and elementary education system. The Minority Student Achievement Network’s Statement of Purpose list several crucial conclusions about the effects of race on achievement in our schools.ii There is evidence that demonstrates that the “achievement gap” is a reality, caused by complex factors including school, community, home, and other societal factors. Currently, K-12 education is failing minority students leaving them behind their white peers in terms of qualifications for a post-secondary education. Therefore, in conjunction with policies that admit students on the basis performance, while being conscious of racial limitations, the long term strategy seeking to increase diversity on campus must begin off campus. Affirmative action is at worst ineffective and at best a partial, short-term solution to the achievement gap between races. The fight for diversity and equal opportunity is a battle that must be fought before students are of college-age—this is the only sustainable long-term solution.
Diversity in the classroom results in a better overall learning experience. David Bok makes the case for diversity quite well when he quotes a Princeton graduate who said, “People do not learn very much when they are surrounded only by the likes of themselves.” Bok mentions that his experience as a Harvard Law Professor and Dean of Harvard’s law school, that “learning through diversity” does indeed occur, during the casual encounters of students, study groups, and extracurricular activity which lead to interaction of students of vastly different backgrounds and experiences.iii Students with life experience can provide, in conjunction with academic works, a story filled with obstacles and life experiences that are not parallel to their peers. Can the impoverished not explain their conditions best? Can the middle class student not explain what was successful in their own community—methods and techniques not present in failing communities? The conversation is far more productive, more inspiring, and more conducive to learning when different perspectives are articulated and challenged, and their implications are explored. All forms of diversity serve to change classroom discussion. Varying view points and personal experiences allow each student to bring a unique context. If the university creates an environment in which students debate an issue or viewpoint that may otherwise went unnoticed, it has succeeded in taking a small step towards a better education for all of its students.
The cost of education is a serious limiting factor for many students wishing to seek post-secondary study at elite research universities. Not only has the cost of higher education risen versus inflation, but government support per student has declined relative to expenditure per students.iv<br>
The increase in cost can be attributed to several factors. Part of an elite research institution’s prestige comes from that institution’s ability to attract the top researchers in the country. These are the most famous researchers, the researchers doing the most exciting work on the cutting edge, and the researchers who bring in the most grant money to their institution. Overhead on large grants given to laboratories to conduct science research is a tremendous source of income for universities, not to mention the increased “pull” such faculty members can have on prospective students. But science labs are costly and new equipment is constantly needed. Science and technology appears to be paving the path for our future, and we couldn’t have picked a more expensive hobby.<br>
Competition amongst colleges to “recruit” the top students has greatly increased in recent years. Often, when competition is discussed it is done so from the point of view of the student—more students than ever are applying to college with greater qualifications than ever before resulting in lower admissions rates than ever before. However, with more institutions rising to prominence, a society-wide questioning of the value of an elite education versus a “second tier” education, and students willing to travel further and apply to more schools than in the past, the elite university must ensure that it “measures up” to other peer institutions in order to “take” the best students from the applicant pool and admit them in the Fall. This often includes spending more money on student life issues such as better housing and meal plans in order to attract students. Many universities have been forced to go through expensive, “re-branding” campaigns such as the University of Chicago.v Here is the prime example of competition leading to a rise in costs—the University of Chicago, an excellent school with a strong tradition in providing an intellectual education resulting in the output of some of America’s greatest minds could not attract students on the reputation of their education alone. They had to adjust to the demands of students asked to pay college tuition fees that are rising at more than twice the rate of inflation, students who didn’t mind traveling thousands of miles from home to attend school, students who knew that University of Chicago was, “Where fun goes to die.” Spending money on research and faculty is only half the story—the need for new and improved residence halls, better fitness facilities, more accommodating meal plans, higher speed campus-wide networks, better cable plans, a more attractive campus—universities have to spend more to continue to attract students.
There are several, perhaps more important, expenditures at the elite universities. Financial aid is a tremendous expense whose importance cannot be belittled. Education is the primary means through which social mobility in America is achieved, and the university must not limit its student body to those who are privileged enough to be able to afford the rising costs of post-secondary education. Health services have a dire need for not only continued operation but expansion on campuses. Universities are attempting to provide students with a safe, healthy learning environment, but increased stress, anxiety, depression, and general mental disorder on campusesvi require strong response, increasing the number of doctors on staff to increase availability and services.
The case for diversity on American campuses is strong. Whether improving the education of all of its students or attempting to bridge the achievement gap, universities need to continue to identify promising minority applicants. The cost of post-secondary education is increasing—from the standpoint of the institutions and as a result, from the standpoint of the students themselves. This cannot be allowed to prevent promising students from less fortunate homes from attending one of the elite research universities. These two issues, cost and diversity, together encompass the question of Access on the campus.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My answer to the above would require more than statement and that's not my intention. There are too many factors involved in trying to get rid of society's "inequities". I believe that the fact that the rich always gets a better education is overplayed. I certainly do not think that I am going to get a significantly better education at Harvard than at the University of ...... At the end, it has a lot more to do with what the student " wants" to get out of the college years. Certain experiences will be unique of course, because of surroundings, classmates, etc. Most of the people that have interviewed me at the ivies have been rather mediocre themselves....and I certainly think that going to the schools they attended to did not give them an extra edge .... What I am trying to say...is that I know graduates from community colleges that have accomplished LOTS more in life than some of these other people...</p>
<p>Enough already....</p>
<p>A determined person will succeed where ever they attend school.</p>
<p>^^^^ Simply put.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I believe that the fact that the rich always gets a better education is overplayed.
[/quote]
Unfortunately that belief is not supported by the numbers.
[quote]
I certainly do not think that I am going to get a significantly better education at Harvard than at the University of ......
[/quote]
The problem exists both in admissions to elite universities and admissions to higher education in general. By elite university, I refer to the 60 AAU universities, including:
Public universities</p>
<pre><code>* University of Arizona (1985)
* University at Buffalo, The State University of New York (1989)
* University of California, Berkeley (1900)
* University of California, Davis (1996)
* University of California, Irvine (1996)
* University of California, Los Angeles (1974)
* University of California, San Diego (1982)
* University of California, Santa Barbara (1995)
* University of Colorado at Boulder (1966)
* University of Florida (1985)
* University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (1908)
* Indiana University Bloomington (1909)
* University of Iowa (1909)
* Iowa State University (1958)
* University of Kansas (1909)
* University of Maryland, College Park (1969)
* University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (1900)
- Michigan State University (1964)
- University of Minnesota, Twin Cities (1908)
- University of Missouri–Columbia (1908)
- University of Nebraska–Lincoln (1909)
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (1989)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (1922)
- The Ohio State University (1916)
- University of Oregon (1969)
- The Pennsylvania State University (1958)
- University of Pittsburgh (1974)
- Purdue University (1958)
- State University of New York at Stony Brook (2001)
- University of Texas at Austin (1929)
- Texas A&M University (2001)
- University of Virginia (1904)
- University of Washington (1950)
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (1900) </code></pre>
<p>Private universities</p>
<pre><code>* Brandeis University (1985)
* Brown University (1933)
* California Institute of Technology (1934)
* Carnegie Mellon University (1982)
* Case Western Reserve University (1969)
* Columbia University (1900)
* Cornell University (1900)
* Duke University (1938)
* Emory University (1995)
* Harvard University (1900)
* Johns Hopkins University (1900)
* Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1934)
* New York University (1950)
- Northwestern University (1917)
- Princeton University (1900)
- Rice University (1985)
- Stanford University (1900)
- Syracuse University (1966)
- Tulane University (1958)
- University of Chicago (1900)
- University of Pennsylvania (1900)
- University of Rochester (1941)
- University of Southern California (1969)
- Vanderbilt University (1950)
- Washington University in St. Louis (1923)
- Yale University (1900) </code></pre>
<p>Canadian universities</p>
<pre><code>* McGill University (1926)
* University of Toronto (1926)
</code></pre>
<p>
[quote]
At the end, it has a lot more to do with what the student " wants" to get out of the college years.
[/quote]
Of course it does.
[quote]
Certain experiences will be unique of course, because of surroundings, classmates, etc. Most of the people that have interviewed me at the ivies have been rather mediocre themselves....and I certainly think that going to the schools they attended to did not give them an extra edge ....
[/quote]
Unfortunately, your personally experiences says nothing to the fact that these universities due offer access to more opportunities and on the whole, their graduates tend to do quite well. Whether this is a product of the students who enter these institutions or the institutions themselves is debatable, and I lead towards the former as you do. However, make no mistake-- minority and diversity perspectives are strongly underrepresented across all kinds of universities. The key statement to realize is that the least qualified quartile of the richest quartile in American attends some institution of higher learning (which includes community colleges and any other formal education post-high school) at significantly higher rates that the most qualified quartile of the poorest quartile in the US.</p>
<p>You're right, participation of motivated, intelligent students will bring them where they need to go. But those students are not participation like they show, they do not participate on a level that is comparable to other developed nations, and this is the fault of two groups-- the more responsible K-12 establishment which fails these students at the get-go and the universities which don't necessarily address these issues as strongly as they should.
[quote]
What I am trying to say...is that I know graduates from community colleges that have accomplished LOTS more in life than some of these other people...
[/quote]
That's never disputed in what I wrote...</p>
<p>damn you're thourough jason. way more effort than i expend...hahah</p>
<p>so how many turkish people do u think apply to Brown and will that hurt or help me</p>
<p>Ghostface, believe it or not, for now, being international, whether you have money or not is far more important than people from your country. While being international helps in the sense that Brown does seek to bring international students to campus, I believe we are not yet need-blind in admitting international students.</p>
<p>oh im not international i was born here in the us but both of my parents were born in turkey and im a first generation attending college</p>
<p>It's hard to say. You'll have as much advantage here as anywhere else that actively seeks diversity as you represent a diverse perspective, however, it's only a very small component of the total picture.</p>