<p>So what are broke-ass-Iraqis classified as :P</p>
<p>[Moderator's Note: this post moved to the ethnic self-identification FAQ thread after topic drift in a thread on the Princeton Forum.]</p>
<p>I was talking about IQ as a variable in admissions. An IQ test doesn't help you get into college. Also, have you taken a psychology class? Psychologist have not come to any conclusion as to what it really measures, they just know that there seems to be a correlation to intelligence. The correlation between IQ and other preformance on other standardized testing is around .8, and the correlation between IQ and grades is about .5. Even job preformance ranges from .2-.6 correlation. IQ really doesn't tell that much, and if anything it tells us how a person can take standardized testing.</p>
<p>[Moderator's Note: this post moved to the ethnic self-identification FAQ thread after topic drift in a thread on the Princeton Forum.]</p>
<p>Ok, I want to make this clear:</p>
<p>Integration began in the 1960's in America.</p>
<p>The cultural revolution began 1968 in China.</p>
<p>How do Asian people have more resources and more of a educational background?</p>
<p>[Moderator's Note: this post moved to the ethnic self-identification FAQ thread after topic drift in a thread on the Princeton Forum.]</p>
<p>i agree with mr. payne</p>
<p>[Moderator's Note: this post moved to the ethnic self-identification FAQ thread after topic drift in a thread on the Princeton Forum.]</p>
<p>ok whether or not asians are genetically more intelligent has nothing to do with the issue of affirmative action...</p>
<p>if asians are genetically smarter...so what?
if they aren't...so what?</p>
<p>the issue is whether or person with lesser credentials should be admitted over a person with better credentials on the basis of race</p>
<p>whether or not there is a genetic difference means nothing...</p>
<p>[Moderator's Note: this post moved to the ethnic self-identification FAQ thread after topic drift in a thread on the Princeton Forum.]</p>
<p>
[quote]
Mr. Payne, I was talking about IQ as a variable in admissions. An IQ test doesn't help you get into college.
[/quote]
The purpose of the SAT is to act as an IQ test, but have a less politically disturbing name. So yes, IQ is used as a variable.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, have you taken a psychology class? Psychologist have not come to any conclusion as to what it really measures, they just know that there seems to be a correlation to intelligence.
[/quote]
I'm quite well read on intelligence. A number which quantifies general mental ability (my personal definition).</p>
<p>
[quote]
The correlation between IQ and other preformance on other standardized testing is around .8, and the correlation between IQ and grades is about .5. Even job preformance ranges from .2-.6 correlation. IQ really doesn't tell that much, and if anything it tells us how a person can take standardized testing.
[/quote]
So basically, IQ is pretty good predictor of a lot of stuff. In the realm of social science, IQ is probably the best predictor of life outcomes (moreso than race, parental income, gender, etc). And yet, you don't think it "tells that much"?</p>
<p>[Moderator's Note: this post moved to the ethnic self-identification FAQ thread after topic drift in a thread on the Princeton Forum.]</p>
<p>.5 and .2-.6 aren't great correlations. Those fall into the range of "medium" correlation. Why do you think they have largely stopped using the IQ test?</p>
<p>The SAT is not an IQ test. Do you study guide's for an IQ test? Is your SAT score determined by your age? </p>
<p>"The College Board states that the SAT measures critical thinking skills that are needed for academic success in college. They state that the SAT assesses how well the test takers analyze and solve problems—skills they learned in school that they will need in college."</p>
<p>The SAT is not an IQ test.</p>
<p>The recent posts here (moved over from the thread in the Princeton Forum) raise a lot of general issues. One of my favorite book recommendations about several of those issues is </p>
<p>Amazon.com:</a> What is Intelligence?: Beyond the Flynn Effect: James R. Flynn: Books</p>
<p>Tokenadult, dont you love this thread??</p>
<p>I am, and I'm sure many of you are as well, tired of being shoved in with the whole 'Asian' category. Colleges automatically assume you are overrepresented and therefore will somewhat discriminate. Specifically, I am Indian, and I can tell you that we are very different from Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and others. Though we are all from Asia, I think it is very annoying to all be crammed into the same group. Indians are not nearly as populated in colleges as other (mainly east/southeast) asians, and so, I propose they split up that very broad category into more specific ones. </p>
<p>So they really need to divide up the category into 3 parts: South Asian, East Asian, and Southeast Asian. The middle east is southwest asia, so that can also be a category, but there might already be one for middle-easterners, so I don't know. Anyway, my point is that the category is too broad to properly find 'diversity' in. Does anyone agree with me here?</p>
<p>Well, let me first start off by saying that Middle-Easterners are considered white (at least at U-Dub they are.) </p>
<p>Anyway, I do agree that certain Asian groups are not overrepresented. I've never heard of Thai or Hmong being overrepresented at a school (in fact, quite the opposite.) I think that at certain schools, they do break Asian down to specific categories (e.g. U-Dub), but have the umbrella term "Asian/Asian-American." </p>
<p>Also, how the heck did Pacific Islander get grouped with Asian? I think that's pretty odd.</p>
<p>Are you kidding? Indians are definately ORMs. With almost 70% of them having a bachelors and 40% having a graduate degree, they form one of the most well-educated groups in America. Indian Americans also have a higher average income than other Asian Americans. If anything, Indians are more represented at top colleges than Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, etc.</p>
<p>Mr. Payne, please see the general link.</p>
<p>Does Being Asian/Indian really hurt or help?</p>
<p>I ask this question, because I've heard both responses. Some people say that its a disadvantage because we are overrepresented at the Ivy League Schools, etc, while others say its an Advantage because many Asians attend Ivy League and other top schools.</p>
<p>Also does being an Asian for example in something not Science/Math related possibly deem an advantage, for examples history/arts/politics?</p>
<p>i've heard a lot that it hurts... cuz the ratio of Indian/Asian college students to Indian/Asian citizens is definitely more than 1 to 1</p>
<p>basically indians/asians are overrepresented in a lot of colleges... but I'm not 100% sure</p>
<p>what? that's ridiculous... isn't that a form of discrimination? Do they even ask you what your ethnic background is?</p>
<p>
[quote]
what? that's ridiculous... isn't that a form of discrimination? Do they even ask you what your ethnic background is?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course it is. It's a program called Affirmative Action that indirectly harms applicants of Asian descent.</p>
<p>I was accepted to several excellent schools--not Ivy League Schools--partly because I had a history of excellence in the fine arts, moral theology, and Latin, I guess. Colleges want diversity in every sense (hopefully).</p>
<p>To avoid this pickle entirely, you could apply to the UCs or CalTech.</p>
<p>Not completely sure of its relevance, but I stumbled upon this article the other day: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/10/education/10asians.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=asian+stereotype&st=nyt&oref=slogin%5B/url%5D">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/10/education/10asians.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=asian+stereotype&st=nyt&oref=slogin</a></p>
<p>It basically serves to get the facts straight about Asians, how quite a bit of them are not in the Math/Science area (especially Asian-Americans as opposed to Asians), how not all of them are smart, etc.</p>
<p>Btw, an Asian senior who came in my English class the other day for us underclassmen to speak about colleges, who was accepted to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc spoke about this, when someone asked about this; I didn't get the full message but he basically said, "Many Asians do not distinguish themselves from others but tend to have similar, overlapping EC's and etc. Even when they don't, at top schools like Harvard there really isn't much room to complain, as there are so many unknown factors counted towards influencing admissions that you cannot solely say that it was precisely due to being Asian that you were rejected. It's not like other races don't get rejected, and good SAT's, GPA, even good EC's aren't guarantees. Taking account to other factors include socioeconomic status, unique experiences, and essays, to diversify the campuses."</p>
<p>Yeah, although he may be a bit biased since he did get accepted...I'm not really sure of this, but a lot of Asians are smart and excel in academics, very focused on top-unverisites and education, and thats maybe why.</p>
<p>As for you saying if you apply to history/arts majors is it better, I'm really not sure, in my school (the only example I have) not all asians are strictly math-science typed, but are rather divided, but then again...</p>
<p>There are good schools that it helps to be Asian at. Not big name schools, but small LACs, schools in the South and MW for example that have a low % of Asian students. Otherwise, yah, it blows, but it does for white kids from overrepresented states too.</p>