<p>"Kenyon is ranked #32 in US News' college guide, so is among the top tier LACs."</p>
<p>I don't think that's really top tier tho. I mean sure it is a good LAC, but usually when I hear top tier or tier 1, I associate it with the best. Kenyon doesnt exactly stick out in my mind when I think of LACs. However, schools like Amherst, Williams, Pomona, Swarthmore, Wellesley, Middlebury, Vassar do. And to say that they are a league above Kenyon would imo be very true, and thus mean Kenyon can't really share tiers with them.</p>
<p>Also, I don't believe being Male is nearly as big as an advantage as being a URM. The ratio in a handful of Lacs is something like 3(women):2(men)</p>
<p>For Whites to Blacks at many lacs it can be/ is closer to 15:1. There's a huge disparity.</p>
<p>It can be a huge factor with private universities/colleges (race), however I don't think it is quite as large as perceived.</p>
<p>^ Yeah, but think about campus social life. It's more relevant to have equal numbers of males and females than equal numbers of people from different races.</p>
<p>Race is definitely a huge factor in college admissions. I go to school with this black female who was accepted at top colleges (MIT, Ivy Leagues, etc) with good grades, decent SAT scores, and no extracurricular activities. An Asian male at my school was rejected by some of the same college with better grades, much higher SAT scores, and a ton of extracurricular activities and leadership positions. So, you tell me how much race helps.</p>
<p>Am I considered a minority if I'm a hispanic who lives in the suburbs (Houston, TX) whose parents, their incomes combined, make less than $60 k a year?</p>
<p>A simple yes or no will do? But hopefully you can explain.</p>
<p>Are you Hispanic? Period? End of statement?</p>
<p>Then it doesn't matter if your parents make 500k a year and you can fly to Belgium on your private jet if you feel like some chocolate - you're an underepresented minority. URMs are judged not by the context of their character (or wallets), but by the color of their skin.</p>
<p>Yes. Of course you are. Latino is latino regardless of what country, state, income or where you live. I live in the suburbs as well but I'm still a very proud Latina who will always remember where that I came from. Hope I answered your question! :)</p>
<p>Yes, you are considered an underrepresented minority.</p>
<p>
[quote]
URMs are judged not by the context of their character (or wallets), but by the color of their skin.
[/quote]
Wow, that's not true at all. If URMs' character did not matter, why do colleges ask them, just like everyone else, to provide letters of recommendations?</p>
<p>As for not caring about their wallets, you are wrong. No matter the applicant's race, colleges always assess the applicant's achievements in the context of the opportunities presented to them. Obviously, wealthier applicants will have access to more opportunities and better resources.</p>
<p>Hmmm... your comment was a bit... ummm... ignorant.</p>
<p>I disagree Newjack88. I am white, but my wife is hispanic, therefore my kids are 50% hispanic. When my dtr. was looking at UVA we actually met with the dean of admissions and explained that my dtr is not from a low socio-economic household and wanted no "hook" from being hispanic. We told them that she wanted to be admitted on her abilities, not ethnicity. If they wanted to give a hispanic a "hook" to use it on a person who was economically disadvantaged as my dtr is not. </p>
<p>Get ready for this:</p>
<p>They said NO! "all URM's are considered the same as far as their admission policies were concerned" Thus my dtr would get a "hook" without wanting it even though she was not disadvantaged in any way.</p>
<p>I was surprised (and disappointed). She did not apply there, but for other reasons.</p>
<p>As usual, this thread will be merged with the much more comprehensive FAQ thread on ethnic self-identification in college applications, which includes links to official federal government statements on the issue.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I disagree Newjack88. I am white, but my wife is hispanic, therefore my kids are 50% hispanic. When my dtr. was looking at UVA we actually met with the dean of admissions and explained that my dtr is not from a low socio-economic household and wanted no "hook" from being hispanic. We told them that she wanted to be admitted on her abilities, not ethnicity. If they wanted to give a hispanic a "hook" to use it on a person who was economically disadvantaged as my dtr is not. </p>
<p>Get ready for this:</p>
<p>They said NO! "all URM's are considered the same as far as their admission policies were concerned" Thus my dtr would get a "hook" without wanting it even though she was not disadvantaged in any way.</p>
<p>I was surprised (and disappointed). She did not apply there, but for other reasons.
[/quote]
Your post does not make sense and illustrates that you have a warped understanding of affirmative action... What exactly do you disagree with?</p>
<p>By contrast, I think Aardvark's post, relating as it does a conversation with an admission officer, makes sense and relates one university's understanding of "affirmative action" correctly. It is still open for discussion whether all universities treat the same information in the same way, and of course we may all respectfully disagree about whether one way of treating that information or another is "fair" or good social policy.</p>
<p>^^^
His post does not make sense because he never said what he disagreed with.</p>
<p>Also, I guess his view of affirmative action is not "warped." It's just a bit antiquated. </p>
<p>Aardvark, affirmative action programs are no longer just about "leveling the playing field," there also about promoting the representation of underrepresented groups i.e. promoting diversity.</p>
<p>EDIT:
You said, "We told them that she wanted to be admitted on her abilities, not ethnicity," which is a bit ridiculous. I think you need to become more informed about the college admissions process. In addition, I hope you realize that what you posted suggests that you believe that all women and minorities who get in or attend competitive universities were accepted exclusively because of their gender or race. Not very classy...</p>
<p>" In addition, I hope you realize that what you posted suggests that you believe that all women and minorities who get in or attend competitive universities were accepted exclusively because of their gender or race. Not very classy..."</p>
<p>No, he doesn't use or imply the word "exclusively." If race or gender is a boost in admissions, then there will be a certain subset of URMs for which race or gender boosted them from the rejected pile to the admit pile. For this subset you could say they were accepted because of their URM status, because without it they wouldn't have been accepted. Aardvark was saying that his kid didn't want this boost for URM status even though it may help them get admitted. </p>
<p>Must you describe everyone as "uninformed" or "ignorant" who disagrees with you? IMO, often you misinterpret what they are saying and then call them ignorant.</p>
<p>Certainly no school will admit her solely due to her ethnicity, but it may be hard to find a school that will ignore it. There is also no universal way to admit a student solely due to ability; there are so many ways to try to measure it.</p>
<p>Litigation has already shown what some college policies have been in some places with regard to affirmative action (for students of various backgrounds). It is not always clear what current policies are at various colleges.</p>