<p>I love how all our chances are slimer than we think. Like this guy: <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/Slimer2.jpg%5B/url%5D">http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/Slimer2.jpg</a></p>
<p>GAclassof2008.......finally, there's someone with a bit of sense in this forum.</p>
<p>The math is so messed up. Do what people said before...divide the overall number of caucasians accepted with the number of caucasians applied.</p>
<p>Of course the math is wrong. Did you even notice that what has been verified by others about admission of minorities (and the fact that their acceptance rate is higher than others') is invalidated by your mathematical "syllogism"?
Clearly there's mistakes in that. Think rationally! Harvard doesn't say:
ok, we'll take 47% caucasians, 23% blacks, 15% indians/asians, and we'll fill in the rest with legacies and athletes. Because by presenting your data in that way:
"your chances are lower because look what happened, and clearly that is the standard"
you're assuming that there's a predetermined formula that is being used...
You're basically saying that according to statistics, if one applies to harvard, their chances of acceptance would be 4%, yet you dont bear in mind the social context, nor the fact that these people don't go with numbers. They admit people with respect to the rest of the applicant pool.</p>
<p>anyhow, the basic point is, your math is messed up.</p>
<p>GAclass2008, yes only dumb people would address a topic which is fundamentally dumb posted by a dumb poster.</p>
<p>er.... right.</p>
<p>WindCloudUltra, are you saying I don't deserve to go to Columbia?</p>
<p>If one is trying to talk in terms of 'figures', based on mathematics and logic, then one should be careful about the validity of the same. The OP, in his/her interest to raise an issue, has ignored the math part of it:)</p>
<p>Well, the math is wrong, but isn't it likely true that the admissions rate for non-athlete, non-legacy white applicants is, in fact, significantly lower than the overall admit rate? This would just mean that the admissions rate for the other groups is higher than 9%, which we know is true for athletes and legacies, and is most likely true for URMs as well. (Asians are a wild card here, because they may have an even lower admit rate, even though they make up 20% of the class.)</p>
<p>wow...it makes me laugh how wrong the math is. lol
If you did the stat analysis correctly, I actually wouldn't be surprised if average white applicant had chances equal to or slightly greater than 9%.
I mean, there are LOADS of internationals and asian-americans who apply with MUCH lower acceptance rate. (internationals probably at 5%, asian-americans probably at like 7%). If you rank the different groups of applicant pool by acceptance rate, it'd probably be something like</p>
<p>internationals < asian-americans < white < URMs, legacies < crazy athletes
(these are the major groups I can think of it this moment)</p>
<p>if you consider this, saying that average white ppl have 4% chances when overall acceptance rate was 9% seems very illogical.</p>
<p>well you know if 2 ppl are equal and one is an urm, they'll take the urm...so yeah it does make a difference</p>
<p>Here's some sound math for you:</p>
<p>1 + 1 = 2</p>
<p>you'llsee + math = some f**ked up shat!</p>
<p>I hadn't thought about international students. How many of them are there in the applicant pool? I suppose it's possible that their low admittance rate would balance out the high rate of legacies, athletes, and URMs.</p>
<p>Ok, the math is obviously off. Fighting on CC doesn't solve anything. PM each other insults. Lol</p>
<p>Peace Maker</p>
<p>Aight, we need to take this thing down.</p>
<p>The TC claims that whites have a ~4% chance of being accepted into Harvard. As many of you have posted before, this is clearly fuzzy logic. The TC's logic assumes all applicants to Harvard are white, which is clearly not true. Let's see for a moment what we have and what we need:</p>
<h2>What We Have:</h2>
<p>This was taken directly from the topic creator's post.</p>
<p>Applicant Pool: ~22,000
Total Accepted: ~2100</p>
<p>Percent of Asian Accepted: 20%
Percent of Black Accepted: 11%
Percent of Latino Accepted: 10%</p>
<p>Percent of Other Ethnicities (Majority presumably Caucasian) Accepted: 59%
Estimate of Legacies: 5%
Estimate of Athletes: 7.5%</p>
<h2>What We Need:</h2>
<p>Percent of Asian Applied
Percent of Black Applied
Percent of Latino Applied
Percent of White Applied</p>
<p>We need all of these statistics to calculate the total acceptance race of each ethnicity. Furthermore, we have no idea the status of the legacies - it's extremely presumptuous to presume they're all white. So, add to that...</p>
<p>Number of White AND Legacy
Number of White AND Athlete
Number of Asian AND Legacy...</p>
<p>And so on and so forth. Without these pieces of data, we can't do much.</p>
<p>The probability of getting into any school, including Harvard, is 50%. There are only two possible outcomes: You either get in, or you don't. 1/2 = 50%</p>
<p>^^We are dealing with with college admissions not coin flips. 50% probability would be true only if the two possible outcomes had an equal chance of happening. Which in the case of Harvard admissions they most certainly do not.</p>
<p>"The probability of getting into any school, including Harvard, is 50%. There are only two possible outcomes: You either get in, or you don't. 1/2 = 50%"</p>
<p>Wow. When ppl say ridiculous things like this, I just laugh.</p>
<p>I love when people do math with their "gut".</p>
<p>So everyone agrees that it's 50%, right? And not 4% like the OP says... some people are so bad with math these days, ugh.</p>
<p>i'm not sure if you are serious or not foolonthehill, but as coureur pointed out, the chance is only 50% if both outcomes are equally likely. but since rejection is far more probable than acceptance the chance is not 50%.</p>
<p>what about the asians/blacks/hispanics/etc that are athletes or legacies?</p>
<p>it is harder for asians.</p>
<p>so stop crying.</p>