<p>Anyone who thinks there is no difference in the life experiences of people of different races in this country is astoundingly naive.</p>
<p>^ I agree. An AA and an Anglo-Saxon could live on the same street, have the same job, and make the same paycheck, yet still have different things to deal with.</p>
<p>On the other hand, it is more than a little naive to say that exactly those students who categorize to one category or the other in the current federal reporting categories have something in common with all students in that category that is not shared by anyone not in that category. One important clue to this is that the categories have changed over the course of our lifetimes. The "Hispanic" category didn't exist at all when I was young. People from India have been recategorized from "white" to Asian" in my lifetime, and people from Guam and Hawaii have been split off from "Asian and Pacific Islander" to a separate "Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander" category since I last attended college, even though people from Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines, which are all countries situated on islands in the Pacific, are still called "Asian." When I consider my own "biracial" and very multicultural children, I think it's the depth of naivete to think that the federally defined checkboxes provide adequate information about applicants to situate them in their life context. Anyone who thinks that "race" in that sense reflects reality is astoundingly naive. </p>
<p>Having said that, I am very supportive of any college applicant from any background describing that background in detail on the application form, the better to allow the admission committee to make an informed decision about how that applicant might help build an interesting and diverse class at the college.</p>
<p>I still call on the OP to back up the incredible statement in the thread-opening post by NAMING the Harvard admission officer to which the "quota" statement is attributed. I don't believe a Harvard admission officer said that, because I don't believe the statement is an accurate description of the Harvard admission process. </p>
<p>See </p>
<p>Harvard</a> Summer Institute on College Admissions, June 21-26, 2009, Suggested Reading </p>
<p>for materials read by college admission officers, including Harvard admission officers, who attend a national summer program on college admissions.</p>
<p>Actually Tyler, I think it's a good thing that I break my points up into easy to assimilate chunks....</p>
<p>Evidently some people here don't know the difference between the words "then" and "than"....can't be too careful when estimating the education of your audience....</p>
<p>Don't pick on my style of writing if you aren't willing to address my argument.
Really, Tyler, ad hominem much?</p>
<p>@Bay/Tyler/ other proponents of racial affirmative action: Again, I think I'm going to have clarify this:</p>
<p>Every candidate comes to apply with a set of accomplishments and a set of opportunities.</p>
<p>Accomplishments are derivative of the opportunities someone had, but also their own effort. The question is: How do we separate opportunity and effort to properly measure achievement? A student that attends Philips Andover will clearly have had much more in the way of opportunity ( THAN has had a student who attends a junk public school), so those accomplishments that are clearly opportunity initiated can be THEN be said to be second to those accomplishments of his that are made by his own efforts.</p>
<p>It follows THEN that a student who goes to the junk public school with similar accomplishments should be viewed as much more impressive....He accomplished similar things with much less in the opportunity department.</p>
<p>A metric like class rank determines not opportunity...but effort, because then there is a (relatively) objective measure of the efforts in one sphere of opportunity to those of another.</p>
<p>So, where does race fit in?</p>
<p>Race doesn't determine your effort....it only partially determines your accomplishments, but only because race GENERALLY determines one's opportunities....</p>
<p>However...I can quite comfortably (don't conflate this with naivety...you don't know the background of experience that motivates people's statements...) say that the amount of money, i.e. the level of opportunity one has is a much better indicator of opportunity THAN race. </p>
<p>So, in measuring a candidate we have
1. Things under the control of the candidate - GPA/Test Scores
- Standardized test scores are standardized and easy to prepare for: Not so important
- GPA measures your relative effort/ability in relation to those with the same opportunities as you: Very important
- ECs: These represent your effort applied to opportunity; the greater the opportunity, the greater the effort should be: Important.
- Recommendations; determined by a candidate's relation to a teacher: Very Important
- Personal Statement; determined by a candidate's effort/opportunity: Important</p>
<ol>
<li>Those things out of a candidate's control:
<ul>
<li>Illness : considered on case by case basis</li>
<li>Loss of life within family/friends : considered on a case by case basis
etc</li>
<li>Opportunity; determined by wealth: considered on a case by case basis to either heighten or deflate the level of accomplishment presented by an activity where opportunity was a factor (ex. Personal Essay/ECs)</li>
</ul></li>
</ol>
<p>{Aside}
See, Tyler? Search your last post, eh? "Then" is a word which expresses temporal relationships, "Than" is a word which expresses relative measures and values...</p>
<p>And breaking things up into chunks of thought, instead of a "nice" looking paragraph is a technique used to express prosody, which gets lost when one types things out, instead of speaking them.</p>
<p>So...Now that I've pretty clearly delineated what determines how much a candidate has achieved, adjusting for what opportunities and experiences they've had, tell me, O Senior Members; what relevance does the phenotype of a candidate have?</p>
<p>Preemption of your arguments:
1.Colleges would be culturally bland: That's like saying "We think only asians and whites would succeed if we just considered merit....", which is bigoted. (And false to boot)</p>
<p>2.Diversity of thought would be sacrificed: Again, the opinions and convictions of a person are a measure of their difference in experience: In academics, I would call that a difference in opportunity, created by financial differences. In culture, I would call that a difference in exposure, created by geographic differences.
I argue that if only merited candidates were accepted, region by region, there would be a distribution of those regional (cultural) differences that didn't compromise excellence.</p>
<p>3.Correction of historic wrongs: This is the weakest and yet most dangerous argument by far. Weakly constructed, and thus dangerous because it presumes some axis of racial value, and sets a precedent for racial justice by arbitration.....but also because it equates an individual with their race.</p>
<p>
[quote]
On the other hand, it is more than a little naive to say that exactly those students who categorize to one category or the other in the current federal reporting categories have something in common with all students in that category that is not shared by anyone not in that category
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with this, and think there should be additional space to provide more specific information about an applicant's race. For example, a student checking the white/caucasian box ought to be given the opportunity to state whether s/he identifies with Irish, Israeli, Iranian or Icelandic origins, if any. More information could help admissions officers create a more diverse class.</p>
<p>collegehopeful: Of which student would you expect more: The son of a Harvard- educated public school science teacher making $50K and a Harvard-educated stay-home mom, who has 3 siblings; or the only-child daughter of two high-school drop-outs who both work full time at a very successful McDonald's franchise and bring home $200k per year? How would you know how to evaluate their "opportunities" in the context of their financial situation in advance of admissions? Would you require tax returns along with the application?</p>
<p>With the incredibly small amount of information you've given me, I wouldn't be able to form any expectations I could later confirm.</p>
<p>Tax returns are required for financial aid, feasibly they could become an optional set of information to present to a college.</p>
<p>As you correctly said "More information could help admissions officers create a more diverse class." In fact, I believe much more information could be used to create a more diverse, and a more accomplished class.</p>
<p>Look at the system I proposed in my previous post: We already have self reporting, and then confirmation of academics, and the personal statement/interview are made specifically to give the admissions office more information about a candidate.</p>
<p>So, to answer your question: It is absolutely possible to create a near algorithmic approach to evaluating how much intelligence/aptitude a student can bring to a school if there is a lot of background ready for scrutiny. Perfect information allows perfect competition.</p>
<p>If an optional tax return, (replacing what I view as the irrelevant optional ethnicity reporting scheme) were made available, or even mandatory, I think it would do wonders to supplement the information schools would find relevant.</p>
<p>At last week's inauguration, Obama approved his speaker saying something racial about working "for that day ...when yellow will be mellow". Afterwards, my Asian friends have been asking: "what the hell does that mean?" Perhaps his message included for Asians not to get mad or uptight when rejected from Harvard and other highly competitive schools.</p>
<p>collegehopeful- "Someone's achievement in an area shouldn't be viewed as more or less impressive because of the color of their skin."</p>
<p>I agree that it's not more impressive but the minority will get in before the majority because of the desire to bring in diversity. As this is just one type, there are several ways that anybody can shine. Don't stress it. In a pool of 20 white/asians kids and 1 black and 1 hispanic where 5 kids are to be picked, the two minorities are just more bound to be chosen.</p>
<p>With that said, I agree with everything else that you said, collegehopeful- you make very intelligent and persuasive arguments. And I agree with everything that caramelkisses said too. </p>
<p>The race topic will never make me mad.. It will only interest me. As a black legacy applicant, I may truly be given favor in the office for reasons other than merit, but it doesn't bother me. I am amused by any system that favors the minority... it's about time... </p>
<p>In such a diverse nation, why not try to give preference to bring in all types of students? It's not like a student is really less qualified to go to a place because he or she scores lower. Who said?? Like several opinions have stated, numbers aren't nearly everything. The point is that all of these people are intelligent, and you can't deny that or their ability to do college-level work. Once that obstacle is passed, competition inceases in similar groups where the most outstanding applicant all-around (with ALL factors considered) is admitted. </p>
<p>(I am not assuming that this is how admissions are done, with race piles...lol)</p>
<p>But don't pay much attention to anything I say because I am very biased. How could I honestly bash something that clearly helps me. lol</p>
<p>greg7: No offence, but you have contributed nothing to this thread. Why does it matter what Obama thinks about Asians?</p>
<p>"In a pool of 20 white/asians kids and 1 black and 1 hispanic where 5 kids are to be picked, the two minorities are just more bound to be chosen."</p>
<p>Can someone give the definition of the minority? Is that they have less number of people compared with the majority? Since when Asians are classified as majority? Are we talking about that the entire Asia is included?</p>
<p>how about indians? lol.</p>
<p>Asians are ORMs, or over-represented minorities. They have about as difficult a time getting accepted as their Caucasian counterparts, due to a number of factors. They are also notorious for being the best test-takers. =P (And last time I checked, Asian = Oriental, Indian, etc.)</p>
<p>23hefvalub23 wrote: </p>
<p>"But don't pay much attention to anything I say because I am very biased. How could I honestly bash something that clearly helps me. lol"</p>
<p>@ 23hefvalub23-</p>
<p>Your entire post sounds fabricated or stupid.Either your a bigot pretending to be black in order to race bait people, or you're an entitled piece of chit.</p>
<p>In both cases, I'm disgusted with your attitude....
The first case: Stop trying to poison attitude on race.
To the second case: So you're black? Would you mind if slavery were legal again? It might benefit a minority of people...so clearly it's A-OK, right?</p>
<p>IN THIS THREAD: ORMs argue against AA, URMs argue in favor of AA, because</a> it hasn't been done to death.</p>
<p>23hevfalub23, I respect the fact you openly admit your biased opinion, and I agree that most applicants (there are some with just horrible stats like a 1730 SAT) can keep up with the course load; however, race does not necessarily imply diversity. Every person, regardless of race, can be diverse in their own way or go through diverse experiences. For example, because I am Middle Eastern, I am thrown into the over-represented "White" (I assume) category for college admissions. Even if I am fortunate enough to be placed in a separate minority category of Middle Easters, URMs have an unfair advantage over my application. I would bet I am more diverse than most URMs because I have encountered unique experiences in my life</p>
<p>(negatives: a war/evacuation, terrorist threats, airport discrimination aka "random screening", racial jokes at school; positives: taking in Lebanese culture (for example, I am really into trance/house music), living in (not visiting!) a fun country every summer, having many friends from different cultures, just basically being unique). </p>
<p>Although my case is an extreme example of diversity, I bet many white/ Asians are more diverse than URM applicants. I do not think I should have an added admissions benefit because I am"Lebanese", but because I have unique experiences. I have several Lebanese friends who know nothing about their heritage; they live completely similar lives to that of their peers. So, even though they are considered minorities, they do not represent any racial diversity. Diversity should not be measured by race; nor is diversity limited to race.</p>
<p>At the risk of repeating myself, I'll try this one more time: </p>
<p>waitn184, you say: "Life experiences are not limited to race."</p>
<p>No one is saying that life experiences are limited to race. But race does inform life experience! The simple fact that race by itself is not sufficient to offer a complete picture of life experience DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE SHOULD IGNORE IT COMPLETELY. Put in other terms: Ice cream is not limited to strawberry flavor. ... So since strawberry isn't the only flavor, does that mean it's not ice cream at all? Should we just pretend strawberry doesn't exist when we discuss ice cream? THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. </p>
<p>Also, I'm not sure what this statement means: "I bet many white/ Asians are more diverse than URM applicants." I'm assuming you're using the word "diverse" to mean unique or interesting. It's true that a person of any race can have unique and interesting life experiences - no one is disputing that. </p>
<p>Let's imagine for a moment that college is a cocktail party, and your goal is to have the <em>most diverse</em> cocktail party possible for the sake of ensuring fascinating conversation. If everyone at your cocktail party is white, it could certainly be a diverse party. People would inevitably have different national origins, different political views, talents, hobbies, life experiences and interests. </p>
<p>But is that the most diverse party possible? Wouldn't it be preferable to have a variety of political views, talents, hobbies, life experiences, interests, and RACES? A party that ensured a variety of races ALONG WITH everything else would be diverse IN MORE WAYS than a party that ignored race altogether.</p>
<p>It's really frustrating to see people so determined to deny that race is a part of life experience and DIVERSITY just as much as anything else is. The only way that denying this makes any sense is if you believe that race has no impact on a person's life in America. No, not just their socioeconomic status or "opportunities", but their LIFE: the day-to-day interactions they have with people, the way they view themselves, they way they see themselves reflected in culture. These are all perspectives that are worthy of being considered when deciding who gets invited to the cocktail party.</p>
<ol>
<li>Congrats on getting into MIT.</li>
<li>It's not as though it gets old for those that like discussing it.</li>
</ol>
<p>
[quote]
Put in other terms: Ice cream is not limited to strawberry flavor. ... So since strawberry isn't the only flavor, does that mean it's not ice cream at all? Should we just pretend strawberry doesn't exist when we discuss ice cream? THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Your analogy is flawed. What waitn and I are essentially saying is that race in particular does not inherently always have a huge effect on life experience. I have some friends who are really involved in our black affinity group who say the same. My part of the country, and even more so my immediate environment, is very colorblind and PC. No one disputes this. Compare this to being a black student in a racist area. Race is the catalyst.</p>
<p>Actually, your example demonstrates my point very well. Take the 'strawberry' ice-cream. Now say that you had 17 bins of it. One tasted like vanilla, but worse. Another tasted like chocolate, but better. Another tasted the same as pistachio. Some of those bins tasted like STRAWBERRY. Would you pick the bad-vanilla-tasting strawberry for the sake of diversity? What about the chocolate strawberry, which tastes better than the actual chocolate? What about the strawberry strawberry? Some bins will taste better than others, right?</p>
<p>Consider the strawberry color our perception of what race means, and skin color. Consider the taste accomplishments and experiences. See what I'm getting at?</p>
<p>First, I'm going to set aside the ice cream analogy because you're using it in a completely different way than I was.</p>
<p>Second, if these students don't believe that race has any measurable effect on their life experience, what are they doing in a black affinity group? What purpose does the group serve if your community is as colorblind and PC as you say? Also, do you and the rest of the group never come into contact with people or media from outside your colorblind, PC community? Unless you all live in a magical bubble that filters out any influence from non-colorblind and non-PC sources, your experience and view of the world has in some fashion been shaped by your race. I'm not arguing that it's the PRIMARY guiding force of your life experience, or even a "huge" force, to use your words - but it's a force, just like any other force, and therefore should be taken into account when trying to get a full picture of you as an applicant. Race doesn't inherently have a HUGE effect on life experience, as you say. But in America, regardless of where you are, it has some effect. </p>
<p>To address your second point, at the risk of repeating myself, AGAIN:
What is the objective standard of "bad?" Can it be measured only in terms of SAT score or GPA? If so, AGAIN, please tell me the good vs. bad cut off. </p>
<p>On the other hand, if numbers aren't everything, and we're looking at applicants to get a full picture of them as individuals and in terms of what they contribute to the class, then admissions committees should be able to take into account every piece of information they can get about an applicant.</p>
<p>You can't have it both ways, so which is it?</p>