<p>So I'm pretty sure (although some deny it) a lot of colleges and universities admit (not solely) based on an applicant's ethnicity. </p>
<p>Well I'm Asian. I'm conscious of the fact that being Asian is pretty disadvantageous in the admissions process. But do you guys know if they are cognizant of an applicant's nationality? </p>
<p>I don't want to sound racist (or nationalist?) or anything here, but most of the Asian population in top universities like Harvard are comprised of the Chinese and the Koreans. Which puts me at a disadvantage because I'm Japanese, and there is definitely a lack of Japanese applicants in the applicant pool :/</p>
<p>If you are a Japanese national you will be applying as a foreign student and the school will of course be fully aware of your nationality.</p>
<p>If you are a Japanese-American applying as an American citizen and are worried about being “mistaken” for a Chinese- or Korean-American, I wouldn’t worry about it. I imagine there are plenty of people in the Admissions office who can distinguish a Japanese surname from a Chinese or Korean one.</p>
<p>" I’m conscious of the fact that being Asian is pretty disadvantageous in the admissions process." </p>
<p>I’m Asian and I dispute that assertion. Rather, being “boring” is a disadvantage in the admissions process.</p>
<p>If you get accepted/rejected it won’t be because you’re Japanese. It’ll be because Harvard finds you interesting or not. Don’t blame it on ethnicity/nationality.</p>
<p>@T26E4 If you literally read what chilli2004 is saying you are right, but if you read into what the person is saying chilli is absolutely right. Asians typically are 20% or less in private schools. The number of Asian kids that come through with very high GPA and Standardized test scores only means that Asians have to be at a far higher GPA and test score level to make it.</p>
<p>It would be nice if schools published their acceptance rate for each of the ethnicity.</p>
<p>T26E4: but why is it “boring” for Asians to play piano, play tennis, play the violin, ping-pong, be in science/math club, robotics, math competitions…etc… (extracurricular activities that apparently are a stereotype for Asians) but not for other races? Not saying you are saying that but based on what I’ve read on CC that’s what I’m getting.</p>
<p>@neorobie: My assertion is that the white kid from suburban Cleveland, who plays tennis and is a math/sci club, robotics team capt is equally interesting as the person you describe – and will face the similar challenge that she looks exactly like 100s of other applicants. I’m not saying that she nor the similar Asian kid isn’t qualified to get a great education, even one at Harvard.</p>
<p>But how do you stand out? By doing “typical” ECs or experiences? That’s not the way. Asian or white or practically any other race – you gotta stand out. cuz the pool is huge and it’s easy to get lost. What’s your story??? Will your story grab a file reader? </p>
<p>If it’s the same refrain, your chances diminish – even if your SAT is 80 pts higher than the next guy.</p>
<p>I might be mistaken, but I think what neorobie was trying to say is that why would an African American who is really into math be considered interesting while an Asian who is really into math would not be. </p>
<p>An AA who is a math super scholar, on the whole is rarer than an Asian. That perspective would therefore be more valued than the 8th or 9th Asian kid. Simple (at least to me). Yes. I want diversity. I find it has inherently more value than just the top test scorers. The top schools feel the same.</p>
<p>I don’t really want to get into talking about AA since its quite pointless, but I heard that the Supreme Court is going to rule on it again pretty soon. Has anyone heard anything about this?</p>
<p>I also heard that the last ruling a couple years back to ban AA came really close, like the difference between opposed and for was only 1.</p>
<p>Once again I’m not sure of any of this and any clarification would be great.</p>
<p>Jeffrey: I believe you speak of Michigan vs. Bollinger in 2003(?). Yes, it was a 5 to 4 ruling. Since then, however, we’ve had a black president, among other things, and they’re planning to hear a case this fall, I believe (Texas vs somebody). They predict it very well may be overturned with the new justices and the fact that one female liberal judge will not be on the panel because she previously served in an upper-level Texas department, the state in which the case is from. </p>
<p>Colleges want people who are going to succeed after they graduate. Yes, I believe race is a factor becasue if AA is active, then how can it not be? Some races will be helped and some will be hurt, plain and simple, but it’s about future success and what you can give back to the college in large part.</p>
<p>I believe Justice Kagan won’t participate in the case because, as U.S. Solicitor General, she was involved in framing the U.S. Justice Department’s position as an intervenor in the case. That won’t affect the outcome – if the Supreme Court would have upheld the University of Texas’ system 5-4 with Justice Kagan voting, the vote will be 4-4 without her, and the lower-court ruling will be affirmed on that basis. The university’s affirmative action policy was upheld by the court of appeals, based on the Bollinger case. (It wasn’t Michigan v. Bollinger, by the way . . . Lee Bollinger was the president of the University of Michigan, and effectively in the case he was the stand-in for Michigan.)</p>
<p>It’s pretty unlikely that the Bollinger doctrine will survive. Justice Kennedy, who is usually the swing vote between the relatively liberal and relatively conservative blocs on the Court, was a vociferous dissenter from the ruling in Bollinger that upheld some affirmative action policies, and there are four other Justices who either joined him in dissent in that case or are known to oppose affirmative action strongly.</p>
<p>If the concern is really the generality of practice at various colleges and universities in the United States, the correct place to discuss that is on the College Admissions Forum in the thread with much FAQ information and discussion on that topic. </p>
<p>The specific practices of Harvard College of Harvard University (what this forum is about) are reported (as to actual results) through the U-CAN site, based on official federal definitions of various “race” and ethnicity groupings of students that you can find in the first few FAQ posts in the main FAQ and discussion thread. The Harvard enrolled student figures </p>
<p>show a moderate number of enrolled students reported as “race/ethnicity unknown,” so it’s possible for an applicant to be successful for admission to Harvard (the topic of this forum) while making use of the opportunity to decline to answer the VOLUNTARY questions on race and ethnicity on the Common Application. </p>
<p>I’ll close this thread now to concentrate discussion of this issue where it is most on-topic. Good luck to everyone waiting still for this year’s admission decisions, and to all of next year’s applicants.</p>