<p>"@Hanna, do ORM’s not have to deal w “stuff” weighing on them?"</p>
<p>It’s a different set of stuff, which is evident from their academic performance – unless, of course, you agree with post #377 that the cause of ORMs outperforming URMs is that URMs are just born dumber. If they aren’t just born dumber, then something is holding them back, something that is there even when they have high SES and go to good high schools.</p>
<p>It goes without saying that there is invidious racism against Asians, too. But a societal assumption that they’re all a bunch of nerdy foreigners who can’t drive has different effects on a child’s soul from a societal assumption that they’re all a bunch of violent freeloaders who can’t learn. (And who are genetically too stupid to catch up, a belief which is mainstream enough that it turns up here frequently. One thing we can be confident about is that for every person voicing that opinion, a lot more are thinking it.)</p>
<p>Yes, it’s true. She definitely would never have been accepted to St. Marks, no matter how stellar her stats, no matter if she had aced every section of the ISEE (standardized admissions test for the most selective private schools in Dallas), was the daughter of a POTUS or celebrity, or child of the wealthiest citizen in the city.</p>
<p>Sorry, Nrds, I don’t know the private school scene in TX, as it obviously shows. Abby Fischer may well not have been able to be accepted to a school LIKE St Mark’s for high school. But then again, perhaps she could have. But in this area, East Coast, getting into the some of the highly selective independent or really any of the highly selective K-12, even nursery programs, is difficult, hence the “highly selective” adjective. It’s more difficult getting into those schools than most of the colleges in the US, certainly UT Austin. </p>
<p>Some of those schools do get away with not ranking their kids, and I’ve known kids in the second quintile of those schools, grade wise still get into Ivy League and other schools with very low accept rates that will only consider the top 5 kids of most high school graduating classes. These schools can afford to pshaw out the ranking, but when a school not up there tries to play that game, they will usually hurt their students. For the most selective colleges, it may not hurt as much,as it is pretty clear that if a kid gets close to 800 on each part of the SATs, 1 and 2 and has straight As taking AP level course, that s/he’s up there, and the average high schools, even the sorta above average high school are just not going to have more than a couple of such kids anyways. That kid will likely get into a highly selective school even if the high school refuses to rank. And those schools with single digit accept rates aren’t going to be that interested in those kids without the ueber high test scores, straight A’s in obviously tough courses regardless of the kid’s class rank. Where it hurts is when they lose out on the auto accepts that a university like UT Austin has based on rank. Again a kid with those very top stats is highly likely to get accepted holistically anyways, but the kid who has the lower test scores but great grades and rank is the one who loses out. UT Austin has actually been generous with kids in that situation, unlike some flagship school that have become virtually impossible to get acceptance without the test scores. I have two nieces who don’t make the cut due to test scores, for the top state school in Virginia. I have friends who ran into the same thing in Georgia. With so many kids now wanting to go instate with HOPE, UG and Georgia Tech, cannot take all of the very good students who want to go there. The test scores really start to count. I know a number of friends whose kids got the state money, because their had good grades, but the test cutoffs were an issue, this in Georgia. And Georgia Tech accepted my 3.0 son with near perfect SAT1s–no question where the emphasis is for admissions there.</p>
<p>Also, URM is a situational category. I know a number of Asian URMs. They are eligible for all sorts of programs and perks at some schools where ANY one of color is a URM. In some schools to be Latino or AAis to be an ORM.</p>
<p>Actually, I doubt she would have, which is why, after my ribbing, I said your point was valid. Some of the “elite” private schools are preschool through 12th grade, so it is conceivable that a less than stellar kid could test in early, but usually those kids leave before they finish high school. I know that the all-girls school comparable to St. Marks would consider a 1350 SAT just average, and if memory serves, she was far below that. Grades were just okay, but with the vigor of a top prep school, one could probably speculate that they would not have been even that high in that kind of environment had she managed to get in to a school like that.</p>
<p>It is kind of puzzling why this particular student was chosen to launch this kind of lawsuit.</p>
<p>This is a good point. Here in Minneapolis-St. Paul, we have a substantial Hmong population, an ethnic minority from southeast Asia (Laos/Cambodia/Thailand/Vietnam). It’s mostly a low SES community who were first admitted as refugees from ethnic and political persecution, and eventually were allowed to bring over family members. They’re regarded as URMs and get all the “diversity points” in our public college admissions that African-Americans and Latinos get. And I believe at some Midwestern LACs, even Chinese-Americans and South Asians get diversity points. There just aren’t very many Asian-Americans in, say, Iowa.</p>
<p>^Same in WI. My kids’ backpack mail comes in three languages–English, Spanish and Hmong. Which is interesting because Hmong is apparently primarily a spoken language and many of the families who need translation don’t read it. The automated phone messages are translated too. Most Hmong families here are very poor and their kids often struggle in school both academically and socially. Their culture is very, very different from ours and they often face challenges assimilating with their peers while maintaining traditions at home–at least that’s what the Hmong kids I know have told me.</p>
<p>Earlier in the thread it was implied that the reason 168 URMS with better stats than Fisher were rejected was because they were too poor and UT was looking for wealthy URMs. That sounds like another lawsuit just waiting to happen to me! Are public schools really able to defend this? I understand OOS and international being about cash flow, but in state? doesn’t this fly in the face of what holistic admissions are supposed to be about? Can’t one of those 168 file a lawsuit- it seems like they might have more to be angry about than Fisher?</p>
<p>Omedog does highlight an interesting point. Because the percentage plan admits a sizable number of lower SES applicants who will need FA, I wonder if the holistic round needs to deliberately target more fullpay applicants of ANY race, to balance the budget.</p>
<p>This would put the kids who missed the % cutoff in the low SES schools in a particularly uncompetitive position.</p>
<p>Not his first such post and it won’t be his last. In the last 10 years, race V. IQ has been soundly thrashed by modern science. Yet some desperately hang on to the bad science of old. Whoever doesn’t believe that IQ/testing can be affected by the economics of race should try testing after a few days of a single meal a day. It’s not an IQ thing. It’s an I’m hungry, cold and tired thing!</p>
<p>I guess UT does pick up the fullpay OOS & int’ls in the holistic round. I wonder how the % of fullpay IS admits compares if race and athletic recruits are factored out (i.e. compare only White percentage-plan admits v. White holistic admits). </p>
<p>Is the holistic round a de facto rich kid round?</p>
<p>Preparing for a change? “Dr. Kat’s” article is as much speculation and she is not working for a university. “Could” and “may” don’t convince me. </p>
<p>And, as complained before, one generally doesn’t have transparency in how holistic works. Close only counts in…</p>
<p>And, if the privates wish to perpetuate diversity, of any sort, there are ways they can. The insertion of leadership and how a kid has overcome challenges, etc, as factors has a potency you can’t wish away.</p>
<p>“Earlier in the thread it was implied that the reason 168 URMS with better stats than Fisher were rejected was because they were too poor and UT was looking for wealthy URMs.”</p>
<p>UT is need blind for admissions. I don’t know any state school that is need aware for admissions.</p>
:D</p>