<p>does being hispanic really help that much...?</p>
<p>No. They do not ask for your transcripts, your recommendations, your extra curricular, and piles of essays just to approve or deny you based on your race. It may help, but not as significantly as some believe.</p>
<p>i have a good transcript, good recomendations, alot of ec's, and what i thought was a really good essay, but my sat scores werent that high bc im just not good at the study of english.
thanks tho</p>
<p>I'm sure they'd understand if your English scores weren't superb, especially if it's a second language.</p>
<p>i dont think so but maybe mention it</p>
<p>I'm going to have to disagree but based on the only spanish kid i know who applied to nyu last year</p>
<p>It's not just my opinion, but everyone else who knew him and he himself- if he was not hispanic his chances of getting in were REALLY low. Not only did he get in but he got a scholarship on top of it</p>
<p>i think that ppl often underestimate how much fo a factor race plays in the decision. I think that it will help you a good deal.</p>
<p>That's correct Shermie. Being black or hispanic (i.e. a URM) clearly does help a lot for getting into NYU or any top college for that matter. Indeed, there are quite a few who would have no chance if not for their ethnicity.</p>
<p>I'm fairly stubborn on this topic I admit, but I don't believe anyone can know how much race plays into the deciding factor. Say, you're applying to Harvard and you believe race plays into 10% of the deciding factor... well it's great to believe that, but unless you're the deciding admissions counselor, you can't honestly say for sure. You have to be in the room with that admissions person, you have to know what they're thinking and how their reasoning is - even if there is some sort of set school guideline for accepting people, it doesn't mean that admissions' officer has to follow it to the cue. It varies school to school and officer to officer.</p>
<p>I agree that there is a gray area Jesminder and that race is not dispositive as the only factor. However, there is no question that blacks and hispanics on average get in with considerably lower stats than whites and asians (I don't want turn this into a thread on AA since that's not the topic here, but these are the facts). </p>
<p>Based on the discrepency alone, it's fair to say that race does play a role in the admissions process. Since the OP asked about being hispanic, the answer is that yes, it well help a good deal. Put it this way, all other things being equal, it'll increase one's chances if he has the URM card.</p>
<p>
[quote]
get in with considerably lower stats than whites and asians
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're assuming that whites and asians are not part of the URM - AA area. White females are considered to be URM and are just as much assisted by AA as any hispanic, middle eastern or african american....</p>
<p>But you're right, I've swayed the point... so Back on topic</p>
<p>"White females are considered to be URM and are just as much assisted by AA as any hispanic, middle eastern or african american...."</p>
<p>Actually's that's not true at all. White females are NOT considered URMs at all for schools like NYU. For some hardcore engineering schools like Caltech, white females (in fact all females) are cut some slack for AA purposes, but not nearly as much as blacks or hispanics. Also, middle eastern people are not helped by AA all that much either.</p>
<p>They are helped, I wrote a fifteen page paper on this AA two years ago, according to the government - the same government who issued the AA law, all women of every race are considered URM. Anyone who is not a white male is considered URM. There are some links about it online if you wish to do some further research.
It's just that most people do not know this, and anytime they hear AA they automacially think black, and then maybe some of the othe races.</p>
<p>Eh... doesn't really matter though I guess. I'll return this back to OP's topic.</p>
<p>I'd like to see what evidence you have Jesminder. Was this a high school paper or something at NYU? All evidence currently indicates that blacks and hispanics benefit from AA much more than white females, who don't benefit at all unless you're talking about some overwhelmingly male place like a few engineering schools. Certain races however, benefit everywhere. </p>
<p>Here is a relevant quote on SAT differences:</p>
<p>"Sex-based affirmative action bears virtually no resemblance to its race-based counterpart. The scholastic qualifications of females as a whole are largely comparable to those of males. The College Board reports that in 2002, female test-takers achieved an average score of 500 on the math SAT, a relatively modest 34 points lower than the male average. Meanwhile, the verbal SAT scores of females and males were nearly identical 502 and 507, respectively.</p>
<p>These differences come nowhere near the black-white disparity, which generally hovers around 200 points (on the math and verbal tests combined) in any given year. Indeed black students at most competitive colleges and elite universities have median SAT scores ranging from 180 to 230 points lower than the median of their white classmates. Moreover, the median SAT scores of black admittees are often significantly lower than the median scores of whites who are rejected. This state of affairs simply does not exist across gender lines." </p>
<p>For more info, see:
<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8861%5B/url%5D">http://frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8861</a></p>
<p>Ironically, your answer had absolutely nothing to do with the subject.
Nonetheless, URM's are not only based on race, as the ignorant think. It is also based on gender - <a href="http://www.state.ct.us/chro/metapages/legalprot/AAlinks/AffirmativeActionReport.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.state.ct.us/chro/metapages/legalprot/AAlinks/AffirmativeActionReport.pdf</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
a. Underrepresentation - A situation that exists when the employment percentage of a race and sex group listed below is less than the group's corresponding percentage in the comparable civilian labor force:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>White females;</p></li>
<li><p>Black males and females;</p></li>
<li><p>Asian/Pacific Islander males and females;</p></li>
<li><p>Hispanic males and females; and</p></li>
<li><p>American Indian/Alaskan Native males and females.
[/quote]
</p></li>
</ol>
<p>
[quote]
Guidelines for the Department of a Federal Recruitment Program" dated December 12, 1978 and expanded coverage to include White females.... FEORP Plans are in integral part of the affirmative action process as required by EEOC.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
b. "Minority/sex group" refers to the racial and ethnic groups classified as "minority" for the purpose of data collection by the OPM and the EEOC in furtherance of Federal equal opportunity policies. The minority/sex groups covered by the FEORP are: Black males, Black females; Hispanic males, Hispanic females; Asian American/Pacific Islander males, Asian American/Pacific Islander females; American Indian/Alaskan Native males, American Indian/Alaskan Native females; and White females.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
a. The Affirmative Action Program for Minorities and Women is designed to ensure equal employment opportunities, agencywide,l for women and minorities of the following racial/national origin groups: Blacks, Hispanics, Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders, and American Indians/Alaskan Natives. For purposes of affirmative action planning, the following definitions (see MP-1, pt. II, ch. 26, app. A) are used:
[/quote]
Common sense is my evidence.</p>
<p>Regarding your cite, we're talking college admissions, not labor force or federal gov't recruitment. For private schools, it's irrelevant how the government defines URMs, since they are private and have their own policies. </p>
<p>The numbers speak for themselves. Race based preferences are far greater than anything that's gender based, especially at a school like NYU where women now outnumber men, and no such affirmative action even exists for white females.</p>
<p>The government is the one who enforced the rules, if it weren't for the government these colleges wouldn't give a flying care about URM's. They wouldn't be working so hard to gain minorities uless they were loosing or gaining something from the government for it. Really now, do you think almost all colleges just decided to enforce EOP and AA just for the heck of it? </p>
<p>The point, also, is that you said white women were not a URM. as well as middle easterns and asians, when they clearly are.</p>
<p>"The government is the one who enforced the rules, if it weren't for the government these colleges wouldn't give a flying care about URM's."</p>
<p>For state schools--yes. For private schools like NYU--no. NYU and other private schools have no duty to have affirmative action, there is no law that says they have to and government can't do a thing about it. They voluntarily have it for "diversity" purposes though. </p>
<p>"The point, also, is that you said white women were not a URM..."</p>
<p>For the purposes of NYU admissions (the topic at hand) they are NOT URMs in any sense.</p>
<h2>
[quote]
NYU and other private schools have no duty to have affirmative action, there is no law that says they have to and government can't do a thing about it. They voluntarily have it for "diversity" purposes though.
[/quote]
</h2>
<p>
[QUOTE]
New York University will continue to cooperate with the appropriate agencies of the Federal, State, and City governments in **fulfilling its legal **and moral obligation in all its areas of interest - education, research, patient care, and supportive functions.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Edited: Wrong link, this is the correct one--- <a href="http://www.nyu.edu/eo/AAPolicy.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.nyu.edu/eo/AAPolicy.htm</a></p>
<p>I suppose their legal obligation was also optional?</p>
<p>"Equal opportunity" and "affirmative action" are not the same thing, in fact many would argue they are the complete opposites! </p>
<p>As the web site that you linked notes, NYU's AA policy was adopted by the university's own board of trustees, not a government entity.</p>