<p>I really don't know... but Chinese-American's are no longer URMs... unfortunately. I've heard rumors that many top school are cutting down on the number of Asians they're accepting. Anyone know if this is true?</p>
<p>According to a Princeton study, 2/3 of blacks and half of Hispanics at top schools would not have been admitted without AA. That ought to tell you how much of an effect there is. The notion that AA is a myth is not in check with reality.</p>
<p>It helps tremendously for private schools. D's friend is a URM who has exactly identical GPA and slightly lower SAT than D. He has the exact same course work except in language(different language). He is a little more involved in his ECs than D. He got rejected at UCLA and UCB where no race are accounted for but got into Stanford and Harvard. While her school valedictorian 2400/4.0 got rejected from Stanford. I have been reading here that being a URM is a slight tip but from what I've heard it's actually a strong shove.
However, in restropect, I read there are only 200+ URMs that have SAT>2200 and are NMS. So I think he is in a small group of people that are coveted by top colleges.</p>
<p>"I read there are only 200+ URMs that have SAT>2200 and are NMS. So I think he is in a small group of people that are coveted by top colleges."</p>
<p>I really...really...hope this is not true.</p>
<p>Search the forum. Generally, at top schools being a URM has about as much weight as playing a varsity sport (and not being recruited.) At top schools like Harvard, Stanford, Yale, etc. there are so few URMs (Hence "under-reprensented), varsity athletes, etc. applying to them, so it's a lot easier for these sorts of applicants to stand out.</p>
<p>I read in the parents forum last year. I'll try to find the post.</p>
<p>Some schools that want diversity only view diversity in terms of race. I know there are URMs who are less qualified than, say, white females, and got into top or very good schools. Usually happens at smaller schools (SWARTHMORE, Ivies, etc;), not huge state schools. In 2006 UMich was subject to a lawsuit b/c it gave minorities "extra points" in the admissions process, and a white female challenged the school /c of the policy(she was very qualified, unlike some URMs). The guy who represented the UMich student is attempting to get legislation passe din sonme states to end "reverse discrimination" in the admissions process.
To late for me.</p>
<p>@Columbia_Student
AA also takes gender into account-is it possible he beat her out because he's male, but she's female?</p>
<p>..........
<a href="http://www.dartmouth.edu/%7Eoir/pdfs/cds2007-2008.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.dartmouth.edu/~oir/pdfs/cds2007-2008.pdf</a> look at table C7 on pgs. 8 & 9 (i know it's not applicable to all colleges, but it's nice to keep this in mind)</p>
<p>AA is not as beneficial as many people think...</p>
<p>Here is the thread</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe, but D has a male friend who is an ORM with similar stats but got rejected at much less selective LACs.</p>
<p>The only people who seem to have a great range of top schools this year are URMs, judging from these threads. Of course, the standards for them have been raised as well, and it may be as difficult for them as it was for whites and Asians ten years ago, but it is MUCH harder at the top schools now for non URM applicants. For non URMs, the applicant with 2200s, and solid qualifications--doesn't cut it anymore.</p>
<p>wasn't there a study about how Middlebury accepted 70%+ of its black applicants? and princeton took about 50%.<br>
I believe the only elite school that doesn't practice AA is Caltech.</p>
<p>
[quote]
For non URMs, the applicant with 2200s, and solid qualifications--doesn't cut it anymore.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I beg to differ...</p>
<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/487056-miracles-do-happen.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/487056-miracles-do-happen.html</a> (rest of the thread)</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only people who seem to have a great range of top schools this year are URMs, judging from these threads.
[/quote]
That's a joke. Perhaps that's your perception because that's what you want to see and believe. It's simply not true. Unique, qualified applicants of all races, genders, socio-economic backgrounds, geographic location, etc. typically have a wide range of top schools to choose from. Why? Because they bring something new to the school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
For non URMs, the applicant with 2200s, and solid qualifications--doesn't cut it anymore.
[/quote]
Not true at all. Look at more of the results threads. Also, selective schools hardly care about "qualifications." If you are qualified for admission, you're qualified for admissoin. What decides whether or not an applicant gets into a selective school like Harvard is what that applicant brings to the school.</p>
<p>My experience: It helps A LOT at very selective, private schools, but doesn't at lower ranked, public schools.</p>
<p>I've seen people from my class get accepted at MIT this year that were not stronger candidates than some of the individuals who were rejected. Two Hispanics, two African Americans, and one Caucasian gained acceptance, and really only two of those individuals were in any way at the same level as the Viet guy and the two Korean girls who applied (and I don't just mean academically..I mean ECs, etc. as well). I found out today that someone was admitted to Yale and Harvard - Hispanic - but, wow, he has definitely not taken the most challenging courses and his ECs are bleak. He has a good GPA, but his coursework is definitely not the most challenging.</p>
<p>I'm not saying any of these individuals are not qualified, and I'm sure they will do a good job wherever they go. They must have written great essays and are good people, BUT so were the kids who didn't get in...and they really worked for it more, in my opinion.</p>
<p>"I believe the only elite school that doesn't practice AA is Caltech."</p>
<p>I'm sure there are more, but that's the most well-known one I know, too.
And the breakdown for CalTech is:
* 39% Asian/Pacific Islander
* 1% Black/Non-Hispanic
* 5% Hispanic
* 41% White/Non-Hispanic
* 11% Non-Resident Alien
* 3% Race/ethnicity unreported
(from collegeboard: College</a> Search - California Institute of Technology - Caltech - At a Glance)</p>
<p>interesting: Diversity</a> at Caltech :: News: Moore Foundation Diversity Grant</p>
<p>HandsAcrossTime:
Why do you feel the need to judge? Who are you to be judging the accomplishments of others? You're not a college admissions officer! You're just a high school student! Also, unless you read the applicants' essays and recommendations, know all their hobbies and ECs inside and outside of school, and know everything about their background and experiences, your assessment of their achievements is at best unfair, if not ignorant.</p>
<p>Wow. ^ I clearly stated that it was just in my own experience. I am not claiming to be an admissions officer and I explicitly stated that these people are qualified. My school is really small, so yeah, I am close to all of these individuals. I'm sure they wrote fantastic essays, but I can't say that the other didn't as well. I do know their hobbies and ECs inside and outside of the school, at least the ones significant and important to them. Why? 4/5 that were accepted at MIT and the one accepted at Yale are some of my best friends! I live on the same block as two of them, and have known them since I was in elementary school. So, don't jump at me. I'm not claiming to know everything in the world. I just stated something that was from my experience. If you all the details, PM me. I'll type up all of their ECs and such, and, hey, I'll ask them for their essays. There's no doubt they'll give them to me. At least they don't try to act like being a URM didn't help them one bit. They're cool with it. I don't know what would have happened if some of them were of a different race, so of course I don't know everything. And that's not to say URMs with great qualifications aren't rejected ever either.</p>
<p>College admissions is a numbers game. Please do not confuse statistics with logic.</p>
<p>Just because someone has a better chance statistically of getting accepted into a top university that does not mean they do not DESERVE to be at the university. Why is every URM in a top college seen as the product of affirmative action?</p>
<p>I hate it so much when students undermine the achievements of other students simply because they are "URM". You simply do not know what colleges are looking for nor do you know what that student submitted in their apps.</p>
<p>I come from an area with top producing, high scoring African American students. The fact that they are highly sought after is the nature of life in America. Do they have a better chance of getting where they want to go than a white student with comparable scores. Probably because there are fewer of them. It does not mean that they do not DESERVE to be at that school. In a past year the valedictorian of our top private school was an African American girl and she went to Harvard - was that affirmative action??</p>
<p>To turn around and chalk everything down to being an URM and the product of Affirmative action is just lazy logic and lazy thinking in my opinion.</p>
<p>Hands across Time - you are definately judging. Maybe you and your friends think that being a URM helped them get into MIT....just in the same way that being a legacy helps some students.</p>
<p>How about all those students who got in on Legacy? Why not shine the spotlight on that population of students ??</p>
<p>I think people vastly overestimate the power of the URM advantage. I'm a Black male, scored a 2370, that's right 2370, not a typo on the SAT's including sporting 800/800/750 SAT II's. I got into Stanford Early Action and Cornell RD (great choices, but not exactly the "range of good schools" Keshira suggested), however I was rejected by both Princeton and MIT. If I had to guess, perhaps 80-90% of the ORMs admitted to these schools had less impressive test scores than me. I think the reason for the misconception about this advantage is two-fold. First, not many people, especially URMs, match my level of achievement. Thus, it would feed into the logic that "since there are not many URMS with 2200+ SAT scores, even at HYPS, a URM with a near perfect score would be admitted no questions asked". The second reason is, people like to blame their rejection on "oh that [legacy/urm/athlete] took my spot." I don't know what to blame my rejection on (I have some ideas), but I'm certainly not blaming it on "the 2100 SAT scoring Asian male who got into Princeton" or the "1900 SAT scoring female who got into MIT". As soon as people realize scores and grades do not translate into a favorable admission decision, people will realize how ridiculous some of the claims are on here.</p>