<p>I was researching about that and guess what ? I am international student at CC and I am paying triple tuition to schools but UC Berkeley and UCLA have so LIMITED seat for international students. I think this is compeletly rubbish and unfair…</p>
<p>UC Berkeley ABSOLUTELY BIAST !
Proof;
[Freshman</a> admission data 2012-13](<a href=“http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2012/04/17/freshman-admission-data-2012-13/]Freshman”>Freshman admission data 2012-13 | Berkeley News)</p>
<p>A large portion of the students come from good school districts where property values are much higher. One can see that as a cost, a barrier of entrance. They spend more money so kids can get into best high school. You can also see many professional tutoring clubs in some of these school districts. Attending these private classes will increase student’s school and SAT score. This is also a cost, another barrier. These are just the obvious ones. There are other types of services for a fee that are designed to improve college chance. Everything I mentioned here are open to all, not just Asians.</p>
<p>College choice at some Asian countries is only based on one single college entrance exam. GPA is irrelevant. Some people say SAT can be mastered. Their tests are very difficult to master. Perfect score is very rare. Their multiple choice questions mean there are 1 or more correct answers for a single question. Professional tutoring organizations are huge business. Many of the parents of the Asian UC students come from this background. They study in the best colleges in their countries. Often, both parents have graduate degrees from American universities. This is also another variable.</p>
<p>I’m a little dumbfounded at what some people think.</p>
<p>Other schools are biased against Asians. The UCs which do not discriminate are thus more likely to be the top school many asians are accepted to. Since it is normal for applicants to matriculate to the best school they are accepted to, the UCs have a lot of Asians.</p>
<p>The more I read topics like this, the more I wish Asians had someone like Jesse Jackson who can set the fact straight. Asians have no advantage at almost any school in the US.</p>
<p>I used to be a neutral for affirmative action. Many Asians, including the former chancellor at Berkeley were supporters of affirmative action. But now, instead of being seen as supportive for diversity, the high numbers of Asians at UC is instead viewed as a symptom of being “biased for asians”.</p>
<p>I rest my case.</p>
<p>Here’s my food for thought. People often oversimplify affirmative action. Evidently, it is unfair to use someone’s race to determine their success at a university. One is born with his or her race and should not be judged on such a quality. Although in today’s society people “embrace” rather than “hide” difference, race shouldn’t play a significant role in determining one’s capability to succeed at a college.</p>
<p>I think that the diversity argument is absurd, because it assumes that race makes someone more unique and therefore will add diversity to the school. Although people can be different, I don’t see in any way how races makes someone different. This argument truly lacks understanding of stereotyping and is almost paradoxical, conveying that the solution to eliminate discrimination is to favor those who are normally inferior. This is, of course, why affirmative action is called positive discrimination in the UK.</p>
<p>The only feasible argument, in my opinion, for affirmative action is that there is nearly a direct correlation between race and economic circumstance and another considerable relationship between wealth and “boosted” standardized test scores. In other words, under represented minorities tend to be disadvantaged when taking tests like the SAT because they lack the resources to prepare whereas Asian students are notorious for their endless studying, which allows them to raise their scores considerably.</p>
<p>It is truly hard to judge the success of students when one compares the environment with the student’s individual motivation. There are surely a plethora of students who are incapable of performing to their full potential simply because of economic and social difficulty. Contrastingly, some students’ motivation is solely driven by their parents. Although these students work exceedingly hard, it is difficult to determine their individual determination.</p>
<p>Does Berkeley rightfully overrepresent the Asian ethnic group? I agree with Bubbles For Sale (sorry for incorrect capitalization) in that Asians are almost always disadvantaged at other schools and it makes sense that more Asians would attend Berkeley for the reasons mentioned. I think the admission process wouldn’t be utopian either way (with or without affirmative action) because both can only predict the future to a certain extent. Even applicants that seem the most qualified can end up being the first dropouts.</p>
<p>Yes & no. Once affirmative action was cut, the numbers of blacks & Latinos dipped. The numbers of whites dipped because the school was less concerned with racial representation & Asians tend to have better numbers. In fact, white students at Cal, whilst still technically qualified, are far less qualified than most Asians. If they let Asians in with the same qualifications as whites, you’d see even fewer. That’s the primary reason Asian population has increased. The other reason is financials. Due to budget shortfalls and cuts, the UC system doesn’t get the funding it used to get. How does the UC’s premier school make up for that? By admitting large numbers of wealthy Asians from Asia, who pay full price. If Berkeley did not do this, financial shortfalls might cause the school to suffer & lose its stellar academic reputation. </p>