<p>That’s basically the same as not marking your race.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I oppose racial preferences too, but snide comments are not going to persuade anyone.</p>
<p>What snide!?</p>
<p>It seems a perfectly equitable resolution to let people opt in to this system. Lets try it for a few years. Why not?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m fine with that, plenty of great colleges here. S is already in one and D will find her place.</p>
<p>If she doesn’t get into her first choice the last thing I will do is blame kids of other races for “taking her spot”. I just don’t see it that way.</p>
<p>You already can opt in or opt out. You’re not forced by law to apply to HYP, you know. Plenty of colleges admit strictly based on SAT/ACT scores.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nicely put.</p>
<p>With the experience of being a member of the majority and the minority, not at the same time, and being lucky enough to be very close to the other group, I’d say that one not seeing the other means that the minority is invisible in front of the majority’s eyes. That put the minority in a really trying situation. However, I’d defend the majority that they are not racists, not at all. </p>
<p>As I’ve said too many times that posters here are decent people, but I’d be more comfortable if people like Obama are on the admissions committees. I bet he understands racial relations better than most of us.</p>
<p>Continuing with our experience…</p>
<p>So these kids, who paid no mind to the race of their friends, finally face admissions decisions. Whispers abound…“OMG! How is it possible that Grace Wang did not get into Harvard?? No one deserves it more than her!” Also comments like…“We can only guess why Maria got into Yale”. Whether these comments are justified is irrelevant, now the kids are confronted with the fact that race matters because colleges perpetuate the notion that it does.</p>
<p>Unz’s proposal for the “Inner and Outer Ring” really sounds like a good alternative to the holistic/subjective methods which are so controversial. (details may be fuzzy, but I would say this is the general idea) - The first 1/3rd of the class would be the “Inner Ring”. These kids would be academic stars, athletic stars, low income, violinists, or whatever would fill any immediate institutional need. The second group (2/3) would be the “Outer Ring”. These kids would be chosen by lottery from a pool of qualified kids. This would alleviate any question of racial preference and everyone would just be left knowing that they were incredibly lucky to be chosen.</p>
<p>This article mirrors what we have witnessed. It is best to regard these schools as private clubs with admissions criteria that are beyond one’s control, such as race/ethnicity, and not take it personally. They are not meritocracies, nor is life. It is very difficult to stomach less than similarly accomplished people being admitted, perhaps with full non-merit based scholarships, while you are denied. It takes the utmost confidence and self-esteem to decide not to attend these schools after receiving an offer of admission when due diligence shows a better fit elsewhere.</p>
<p>Re: #647</p>
<p>Doesn’t Unz’ proposal have the “inner ring” admitted solely by academic criteria?</p>
<p>In any case, he is just proposing that the “outer ring” be chosen randomly among those believed to have good enough academics to succeed at the school, rather than being selected by whatever “institutional needs” (legacies, developmental admits, athletes, racial or ethnic distribution, celebrities, political relationships, etc.) that the schools admit by (presumably, they do admit a small portion of their class based mainly on academics, similar to Unz’ “inner ring”, in order to continue to cultivate the image of being academically meritocratic and elite). But since the schools see the “institutional needs” as being important to them, there is no way that they will follow Unz’ proposal to select the “outer ring” randomly.</p>
<p>^^Okay, I stand corrected.</p>
<p>Maybe the proposal should be altered so that the “Inner Ring” is comprised of academic standouts and anyone who fulfills an immediate institutional need. I would imagine that no more than 1/3 of the class does that now. The most appealing part of the plan is the “Outer Ring” where most of the class is chosen randomly.</p>
<p>Appealing to whom?</p>
<p>"It is very difficult to stomach less than similarly accomplished people being admitted, perhaps with full non-merit based scholarships, while you are denied. "</p>
<p>Not if you stop counting other people’s successes. No one forces you to focus on other people’s accomplishments or lack thereof. Or to “know” what their scores are. Perhaps being a gracious person who says “I’m happy for you” and feels inwardly “Hey, Harvard’s loss, I’m going to go elsewhere and rock that place” would be something to aspire to. Maybe even more important than aspiring to 2400 SATs. Oh - but that would be evidence of character, and we wouldn’t want to demonstrate that, since it doesn’t go on the EC line so why bother.</p>
<p>TO ME, the most appealing part of the plan is the “Outer Ring” where most of the class is chosen randomly.</p>
<p>To me all the “Outer Ring” does is replace a seemingly random process with a truly random one.</p>
<p>It’s appealing because then it gives you a way to deal with your hurt if you / your kid don’t get it, I’ll grant you that. However, preventing hurt feelings on the part of the rejectees isn’t really something elite schools need to spend time being worried about. You can learn to lick your own wounds nd rise above them, you know. No one forces anyone to apply or to be the kind of unpleasant person who complains about other people’s good fortune. </p>
<p>Indeed, I’m willing to bet that if elite schools could tell what the reaction to a rejection would be (ranging from utter devastation and bitterness to “I’m still excited, I’m going to a great school, just not Harvard!”), the lack of character in the first response would be grounds for auto-reject. Who wants entitled people on campus?</p>
<p>So then why would an applicant do any more than meet the minimum Outer Ring qualification, since it would not make a bit of difference? I’m sure there are already plenty of high school students quite adept at just barely squeaking out the necessary A.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But that’s the point. Now everyone will know for sure that the process is random and applicants won’t be questioning “why not me?”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You would have to meet some requirements to be deemed qualified to even be in the pool. Also, you are still applying to other colleges so if you not lucky enough for the likes of Harvard, you still need to be competitive.</p>
<p>Maybe it would help if you guys stopped acting as though Harvard was the pinnacle of everything. Why can’t you just have a healthy attitude about things – it’s a great school but there are plenty of others, I’ll do my best and that’s all I can do and I have confidence in myself that I will get into some great school which may or may not be Harvard and I will rock that place? What prevents you now from taking that stance? </p>
<p>It’s not Harvard’s problem that you have built it up to godlike status such that a rejection is soul crushing. It’s not Harvard’s problem that someone doesn’t have the grace to wish its accepted students best of luck and move on with their day. Why should they have to resort to a lottery just to avoid hurting your feelings?</p>
<p>Can we not have a healthy discussion about this without people judging what someone finds important to them? I do not begrudge anyone for wanting to strive to get into what they think is a great school.</p>
<p>So if this is done across the whole Ivy League and one loses the lottery at one’s preferred school, that can one swap admissions with another who lost their lottery? Can the kid who, through random dumb luck, scores 5 of 5 admission wins sell off his other 4 slots to pay his tuition?</p>