How are Asian Americans Advantaged?

Applying to College
41

<p>I'd like to reiterate the important point PhatAlbert made earlier -- that admissions officers are trying to build a diverse class of scholars, athletes, and citizens. As he put it:</p>

<p>"Students apply to colleges and think, I should be admitted before any less qualified students and after any more qualified students. The admissions office looks at it as, we want a diverse talented student body, oh, and the football team needs X, and Y, and the band wants a tuba player, and Z has to get in because his family is a big donor, etc. Fairness to individual applicants doesn't come into the picture." </p>

<p>College is a lot more interesting with people of diverse talents and diverse backgrounds running the proverbial "show." Football and other sports are a source of spirit and pride for schools -- that's why Duke and Michigan are such big draws for students. Musicians and artists bring a campus' cultural life to, well, life. People of diverse cultural and racial backgrounds add stitchings to the global embroidery that we celebrate and must deal with everyday. The problem is, when you take these elements out of the college scene and replace them with the highest scorers and students who win the most notable awards, the scene changes noticeably. Perhaps for the better, but probably for the worse. The students who get the highest SAT scores and the best awards may not necessarily be the strongest intellectual minds or they most talented artists/scientists. Often, they are the product of their relatively privileged backgrounds. College admissions officers seek the students who they believe they have the most potential, even if it means overlooking a Siemens Finalist for an inner-city kid with few awards. That's true equity.</p>

42

<p>^^ Money...</p>

43

<p>PhatAlbert,</p>

<p>I placed quotation marks around “Asian” in my post #28. I did so because I was writing about “the Asians” that brokenw1ngs described. He wrote about people who had seemingly endless financial resources that allowed them to live near good schools, to pay for private music lessons, and to support extracurricular activities. I responded by noting that these choices can be made possible through saving and making trade-offs; having lots of money isn’t the only way to achieve those choices.</p>

<p>The ballot initiatives started in 1996, seven years before Grantz and a decade before Li’s complaint. Who started the first one? Ward Connerly, a former UC Regent who was disgusted that the discrimination he experienced as a child growing up in the Deep South had mutated instead of dying out. What used to be blatant anti-black racism had turned into subtle anti-Asian racism, manifested by statements like, “Don’t you think there are enough Asians already in our campuses?” The second ballot initiative was in 1998, which was still before Grantz and Li’s respective actions. Once again, it was led by Mr. Connerly.</p>

<p>I agree that most of the ballot supporters are whites and Asians. I disagree, though, that they are “angry” and “cried” because they were rejected from their #1 choice.</p>

<p>Given the outcome of Proposal 2 last year and Parents Involved this year, I disagree that there is an “overriding imperative” to allow the use of racial preferences to achieve “diversity.” Indeed, the Court’s opinion soundly rebuked the ideology of “racial balance” as a compelling interest. Colleges should be able to admit the freshman class they want, but they must also not discriminate on the basis of race. There is no such thing as “benign” discrimination.</p>

<p>How to address the historic underachievement of “URM” groups? I don’t know. But, I believe that racial preferences do not properly address the problem.</p>

<p>I do think that college admissions should be fair. By fair, I am not referring to “fair share” – fair. I am referring to equality of treatment. No one should be discriminated against or given preferential treatment based on his race. That is what fair means to me. Going by your reasoning, it was OK for the Ivy Leagues to have anti-Jewish admissions policies eighty years ago since their goal is to educate their students and have no responsibility to treat their applicants fairly. Sorry, I disagree. It is unacceptable to discriminate against an applicant based on his religious belief. By the same vein, I don’t think it is right for universities to discriminate in the name of “diversity” today.</p>

<p>What sort of admissions system do I support? Race-blind admissions. As I’ve written before, race-blind is not the same thing as “solely [based] on academic merit.” Race-blind simply means “do not consider race.” Race-blind admissions is perfectly compatible with extracurriculars, essays, and recommendations, none of which are “academic merit.”</p>

<p>I am OK with recruiting athletes, students with a desired particular talent, and even legacies. Universities want to win in sports. It helps them earn revenues, increases morale of the student body, and keeps the alumni happy, which translates into bigger future donations. If universities want to recruit talented athletes, I say let them. Universities want to further increase the prestige of their name. If they can get a student and cultivate his abilities, that student might become “someone” in the future. If this happens, then the university can claim, “This is one of our distinguished alumni.” Most importantly, they are rewarding merit. Legacy admissions again keep alumni happy, which mean better donations, which mean poor students can attend universities at lower costs. Diversity of the student body is a compelling interest. Racial balance, however, is not. I believe that as long as no one is denied a chance to be admitted based on his race, then diversity will automatically occur.</p>

<p>Basically, I believe the only way to reduce diversity is de jure segregation.</p>

<p>Unless a university is strictly [insert race here], it's not homogeneous.</p>

44

<p>Well there is no way to know why an asian student was denied, just as there is no way to know why a minority is denied admission...i</p>

<p>Take jmoney00 (sorry to put you on the spot man...you were just the last URM chance thread i answered) for instance, denied at HYS. As you look at his stats your initial reaction would be...? yea i know. Now if he was Asian and he got denied everyone would be like "dude its b/c your Asian" when its obvious that anyone with these stats could have been admitted to those three schools (as selective as they may be)..it just proves that maybe HYS wasn't looking for another...yes another well off URM, who probably had plenty of opportunities presented to him ...just as HYS could not have been looking for another typical Asian...i feel it works both ways..the purpose of AA is to encourage diversity and help racial minorities who continue to suffer from the ill effects of segregation and racism. While i dont believe 3-7% is a reflection of diversity at most top schools...i know the sight of 10%+ would have you whiners in uproar</p>

<p>oo and chance the guy hes been spamming the boards for chances lol </p>

<p>College:</p>

<p>GPA: 3.85
Credits: 45 after this semester
College: University of Chicago
Major: Econ
Clubs: Black Student Union, Student Board of Academic Integrity, LEAD</p>

<p>SAT Reasoning: 2290 (on 2400 scale) and 1540 (on 1600 scale)
SAT Subjects: Math 2c: 770 and Literature: 740
GPA: 3.87 uw dont know weighted
Ransk: 9/330
AP: (place score in parenthesis): USH(4) ECON(5) FRENCH(5) CALCAB(4) WH(5) CHEM (3 Yikes!)
ECs: Soccer 4 years (3 year varsity), Basketball 4 years (4 year varsity), Ran track for my High school and broke to school records 100m and 800m, chess club 4 years, tutoring and out-of-school volunteering, NHS member
Awards: National Merit Semifinalist, American Math Competition school winner
Familial ties:None
Ethnicity: URM
HOOK: Dad is an Ambassador
Anti Hook- income 200k+</p>

45

<p>"the purpose of AA is to encourage diversity and help racial minorities who continue to suffer from the ill effects of segregation and racism."</p>

<p>the ill effects of segregation and racism? this clearly applies to blacks and native americans, but what about hispanics? they only have racism working against them- but many groups have racism working against them. if one of the goals is to combat racism then you need to be consistent instead of singling out one or two groups. the anti-semitism present in the world against Jews is significant- yet affirmative action does not seem to benefit them. what about Arabs and Sikhs? even though it is obviously not on the scale of slavery and segregation, how does the internment of the Japanese, if at all, factor into affirmative action? how about the fact that there were laws passed excluding Chinese from entering the US?</p>

<p>"Take jmoney00 (sorry to put you on the spot man...you were just the last URM chance thread i answered) for instance, denied at HYS. As you look at his stats your initial reaction would be...? yea i know. Now if he was Asian and he got denied everyone would be like "dude its b/c your Asian" when its obvious that anyone with these stats could have been admitted to those three schools (as selective as they may be)..it just proves that maybe HYS wasn't looking for another...yes another well off URM, who probably had plenty of opportunities presented to him ...just as HYS could not have been looking for another typical Asian...i feel it works both ways..the purpose of AA is to encourage diversity and help racial minorities who continue to suffer from the ill effects of segregation and racism. While i dont believe 3-7% is a reflection of diversity at most top schools...i know the sight of 10%+ would have you whiners in uproar"</p>

<p>People complain all the time about me using CC results threads to draw conclusions- but you use one example to justify your point in this case. no one is denied solely on race- but you are being foolish if you claim that it doesn't play a major role. </p>

<p>you mention that maybe HYS was just not looking for another "typical Asian".
If you have a candidate who plays violin, tennis, does math team, and has great all-around stats, why in the world should it matter what his/her race is? do you think a white person with these characteristics will really bring a different type of "diversity" to a college than an Asian with these characteristics? but yet, an Asian with the characteristics has commited the cardinal sin of being a stereotypical Asian, a death sentence in college admissions, whereas for say a white candidate with these characteristics, no one would seem to care. how can you explain this discrepancy using "diversity"?</p>

<p>so that you affirmative action proponents don't get to dodge a well made point also-
why don't colleges consider religious diversity? Jews, like Asians, are way overrepresented. doesn't this hurt "diversity"- and why don't they do something about this affront to diversity?</p>

46

<p>well I have never complain so what other people say to you is irrelevant to me. </p>

<p>didn't you see my previous post diversity Is what makes America great so having too many typical Asian (which you clearly laid out) doesn't encompas what any college is looking for. Why should it matter cmon man (would you choose a basketball team with all point guards) NO..b/c it will leave your team weak in other areas..while a point guard may be the most talented player, you can't have an effective team when every one posses the same qualities and don't encompass others (horrible analogy.. I know LOL but I'm watching sportscenter)</p>

<p>All I said was what AA is for I didn't try to justify its definition..just its purpose</p>

<p>And we could go on and on about discrimination...some hate, some love, many accept..I'm not going to go back and forth about every instance of blight and racisim in American history</p>

47

<p>"And we could go on and on about discrimination...some hate, some love, many accept..I'm not going to go back and forth about every instance of blight and racisim in American history"</p>

<p>thank you for dodging my questions.
if you are so clearly right, why don't you just at least address what I said instead of completely ignoring them and relying on talking points?</p>

<p>this is about determining the true motives of those who make affirmative action official university policies.
my question was, if its really about fixing racism- why aren't groups like Jews, Arabs, and Sikhs included?
if its really about diversity, how come no one has a problem with Jews representing 30% of student populaionts?
if it is about diversity- how come no one has any problem when it is blatantly obvious at most top tier schools that campuses are overwhelmingly liberal, as are the professors? isn't this diversity of ideas important?</p>

<p>your point guard to basketball analogy is extremely weak. are people of different races so drastically different- the same way a point guard and center would have completely opposite responsibilities and skills? a more fair analogy would be to maybe say that a campus with people of all the same personality types and hobbies would lead to a dysfunctional campus.
is race the same? what will you gain from people of a certain race that you could not gain from others?
and instead of speaking in abstractions, could you maybe provide some concrete examples of how maybe racial diversity might be of benefit?</p>

48

<p>well I have never complain so what other people say to you is irrelevant to me. </p>

<p>didn't you see my previous post diversity Is what makes America great so having a typical Asian (which you clearly laid out) doesn't encompas what any college is looking for. Why should it matter cmon man (would you choose a basketball team with all point guards) NO..b/c it will leave your team weak in other areas..while a point guard may be the most talented paper you can have an effective team when every one posses the same qualities and don't encompass others (horrible analogy.. I know LOL but I'm watching sportscenter)</p>

<p>All I said was what AA is for I didn't try to justify its definition..just its purpose</p>

<p>And we could go on and on about discrimination...some hate, some love, many accept..I'm not going to go back and forth about every instance of blight and racisim in American history</p>

49

<p>this thread is beast
i guess i'll add a few more things</p>

<p>question to bob: </p>

<p>--- "my question was, if its really about fixing racism- why aren't groups like Jews, Arabs, and Sikhs included?
if its really about diversity, how come no one has a problem with Jews representing 30% of student populaionts?
if it is about diversity- how come no one has any problem when it is blatantly obvious at most top tier schools that campuses are overwhelmingly liberal, as are the professors? isn't this diversity of ideas important?"---</p>

<p>if it's not about those things, then what IS it about? discrimination? Only an extremely cynical person would believe that adcoms make their decisions based on discrimination...</p>

<p>also,
---"what will you gain from people of a certain race that you could not gain from others?"</p>

<p>perspective. cultural values, beliefs, points of view that you never might have imagined. How can people from around the world teach you things? Many ways.</p>

50

<p>thats an easy question to answer
what it is about is keeping the racial percentages in line with those of America- because admissions officers and liberals get this irrational bleeding of the heart feeling when they see a campus that doesn't fit these percentages. so they try to use "diversity" as an excuse - yet its quite clear from their actual selective application of "diversity" that achieving "diversity" in order to have a better education for students was never their true intention to begin with.</p>

<p>i've just answered your question.
now answer my questions.</p>

<p>my question was, if its really about fixing racism- why aren't groups like Jews, Arabs, and Sikhs included?
if its really about diversity, how come no one has a problem with Jews representing 30% of student populaionts?
if it is about diversity- how come no one has any problem when it is blatantly obvious at most top tier schools that campuses are overwhelmingly liberal, as are the professors? isn't this diversity of ideas important?</p>

<p>"perspective. cultural values, beliefs, points of view that you never might have imagined. How can people from around the world teach you things? Many ways."
points of view- how so? do white people and asians as groups have different perspectives and points of views than blacks and hispanics? can you give me an example?
if the interest were truly in achieving varying points of view- there would be massive income-based affirmative action. people of different incomes have drastically different life experiences. the same cannot be said of race.
cultural values? can you give me an example?</p>

51

<p>because i really need to start studying for a final tomorrow, i'll delay answering any other points until i have time, and just post two more thoughts.</p>

<p>the stereotypical asian application can't possibly be nearly as identical as popular belief makes it out to be. maybe the base of grades, SATs, and piano is, but it's about where the application stands out. if grades, SATs and piano are all an application has to go by, it really are not a great candidate for the top schools. if this application has no stand out leadership position, award won, more than ho-hum essays, they're probably going nowhere at Ivy+ schools.
candidates who do go beyond, even if they're stereotypical asian with grades, SATs, piano, violin, whatever, they'll likely be accepted by the top schools. that's from my own personal experience having seen a lot of chinese students that fit the stereotype apply, including myself.</p>

<p>the second point i want to make is just a question. take two identical candidates with life experiences as identical as possible. one of them is race X, and the other person race Y. are they equivalent?</p>

<p>you might disagree, but they really are not the same. no matter how much you want to pretend the world is colorblind, and no matter how great it would be if the world were colorblind, it isn't. the student of race X has had different experiences than the student of race Y, solely because they are race X, even if only in very subtle small ways. those small subtle ways are very important though.</p>

52

<p>"those small subtle ways are very important though."
undoubtedly small differences- neglibibly small. so many other factors override race if you are truly concerned about "perspective" that race itself should be ignored. something so subtle in effect is hardly worthy of using racial discrimination to achieve.
you say that these subtleties are important- yet how much will you learn from these subtleties? a lot? next to nothing? enough to justify racial discrimination?</p>

53

<p>Having only read the first post, your advantage is parental support. School work is valued in many asian cultures. Personally, I have never been told to do my homework, get up for school, fill out an app, search for colleges, study for a test -absolutely nothing. I think I've done pretty well, but I wonder what would have happened had I had an extra little push. This is not the case with any of my asian, indian friends.</p>

<p>ETA: many jobs demand the position must be filled by a minority. I don't know about the states, but it does happen here in Canada.</p>

54

<p>@bob99975
okay, one more because you baited me out.</p>

<p>you're still talking about racial discrimination so you still think that college admissions is somehow about rewarding academic merit. it's not.</p>

<p>college admissions is as much about rewarding merit, as literature is about words. a college admissions office's goal is not to accept the most deserving students, it's to build a freshman class.</p>

55

<p>Where is the evidence that top schools are being discriminatory toward Asians?</p>

56

<p>i want to know who decides whether racial diversity is valuable enough to include in a student body?</p>

<p>Shouldn't we let the university, who are very knowledgeable of what works in education, as is shown in their exceptional schools, decide what is best for the student body?</p>

57

<p>lobgent,</p>

<p>"The Opportunity Cost of Admission Preferences at Elite Universities," by Espenshade and Chung should answer your question.</p>

58

<p>diversity in the minds eye of adcoms is not to fill a freshman class with a certain quota of kids from each race. maintaining diversity means giving a small (not big, small.) leg up to underrepresented and perhaps underprivileged minorities who otherwise might never break out of the social constraints that they are born into. These kids have grown up worlds apart from each other and each have their own story to tell. you said it yourself, "isn't this diversity of ideas important?"</p>

<p>next topic
"what it is about is keeping the racial percentages in line with those of America- because admissions officers and liberals get this irrational bleeding of the heart feeling when they see a campus that doesn't fit these percentages. so they try to use "diversity" as an excuse - yet its quite clear from their actual selective application of "diversity" that achieving "diversity" in order to have a better education for students was never their true intention to begin with."
their true intention being? i want to hear your actual argument instead of just your disagreements.</p>

<p>and now to answer your questions
"my question was, if its really about fixing racism- why aren't groups like Jews, Arabs, and Sikhs included?" - what do these three groups have to do with each other? and what is your question?
"why aren't groups liek jews, arabs, and sikhs included in fixing racism" makes no sense..included in what?</p>

<p>"if its really about diversity, how come no one has a problem with Jews representing 30% of student populaionts?"
-- well, first of all that is a huge generalization that is absolutely false. jews comprise of 30% of the american collegiate population? where are you getting your information...?</p>

<p>"if it is about diversity- how come no one has any problem when it is blatantly obvious at most top tier schools that campuses are overwhelmingly liberal, as are the professors? isn't this diversity of ideas important?"
-- is it not common knowledge that the debate between smarts of blue states and red states are imbalanced? that the smartest states voted kerry and the "dumbest" voted bush? i dont mean to start any conflict in this area, and i by no means claim that dems are smarter than repubs, but this topic transcends college admissions and has nothing to do with racism or diversity.</p>

<p>finally, i'm going to say that i think it's absolutely ludicrous that you believe that people of different ethnic backgrounds have nothing unique to contribute to a campus. I'm not even using strong language; i know people who would go nuts if they ever heard anyone say something like that. just look at ixjunitxi's first post. This thread would be nothing if we were all the same race.</p>

59

<p>Fabrizio, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't that report (which I believe Jian Li cited in his lawsuit) based primarily on standardized test scores?</p>

60

<p>
[quote]

i want to know who decides whether racial diversity is valuable enough to include in a student body?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ultimately, the Supreme Court. Grutter ruled that diversity is a compelling state interest. Parents Involved clarified that by emphasizing that racial balancing is not diversity. Justice Kennedy voiced support for diversity in his controlling opinion but noted that the validity of diversity depended on its meaning and definition. Though he unfortunately did not specify what constituted diversity and what didn't, I believe that he doesn't view racial balancing as tantamount to diversity.</p>

<p>
[quote]

Shouldn't we let the university, who are very knowledgeable of what works in education, as is shown in their exceptional schools, decide what is best for the student body?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The Ivy Leagues used to think that what was "best" for the student body was making sure that there weren't "too many" Jews. Other universities thought that segregation was "best" for the student body. Ward Connerly recounts how an administrator once asked whether Asians had more than their "fair share" at the UCs. Half a decade ago, Michigan gave twenty points out of 150 to students who were part of "under-represented" groups, even if they came from wealthly families and could afford the private test prep that "every Asian" automatically has.</p>

<p>In other words, no, we shouldn't let universities go unchecked in deciding what is best for the student body.</p>