<p>So earlier this year I posted about a classmate whose mom or dad (idk which one) is a WHITE south african....She checked both white and black on her Apps.....
She recently told us about her getting into USC... a wonderful school, but she ONLY got it because she LIED about her race! Her stats were not good enough to get her in without using a cheap excuse that she is URM when actually she is not!</p>
<p>I feel bad for all of you rejected from USC (in Cali btw), as people like her are playing the system while you are working hard and getting gypped.</p>
<p>It asks which race you identify yourself as, not the color of your skin. If she truly identifies herself as black and considers herself black, she didn’t lie.</p>
<p>in addition, without affirmative action, schools could potentially lack a similar diversity that is apparent in the real world. Since college is a form of preparation for the real world, colleges have the right to ask about specific demographics and use that knowledge in their admissions decision.</p>
<p>South African (Afrikaans) friends of ours had their children check “other” and call themselves “South African” as the parents/kids were born there. They are looking for financial aid. As immigrants who have worked within the system to become US citizens,I don’t begrudge them in the least bit; they left their home country with practically nothing and are now negotiating a foreign (to them) university education system.</p>
<p>What’s funny about this post is that it implies that any URM could get into the USCs with bad scores. URM does not give you that great a boost, it’s basically just like if it comes down to a white guy who has the same scores as you and there’s you, then they’re choosing you. The benefit that comes from being a URM is massively over-hyped by paranoid suburban white people. She wouldn’t have gotten in if she didn’t have the requisite scores.
I understand this is frustrating for you, but demeaning her academic success doesn’t make yours any better.
Oh, and “gypped” is an offensive term, based on a discriminatory stereotype. Most people won’t get upset over it, but if I were you I’d still refrain from using it.</p>
<p>She didn’t “lie”. A lot of people are misinformed on the difference between “race/ethnicity” and “nationality”. Her nationality is South African (IF she is from there like she moved to America from there/lives(d) there)</p>
<p>Her RACE/ETHNICITY-- WHICH IS ASKED FOR ON COLLEGE APPS-- is white. </p>
<p>A lot of people have this confusion. </p>
<p>Apps don’t ask “what group do you identify with” it explicitly asks for race/ethnicity and THEN asks what group you are under (ie if you check off black, the options might be African, African American, Caribbean, etc)</p>
<p>Thanks for clearing that up CPUscientist3000.</p>
<p>I remember the OPs other thread and I agree the applicant didn’t intentionally lie. The issue if confusing for many people so the college applications should explain very clearly what they are asking for. The problem here is with the ambiguity on the college applications.</p>
<p>It IS a boost to be URM…how can anyone argue with that and think they are right???
-and by “Not good enough for USC” I checked their average stats and such…certainly not concrete, but hey, it is the only way I have of comparing anything.</p>
<p>THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS POST WAS TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION OF WHY PEOPLE ARE GAMING THE “IDENTIFY YOURSELF” QUESTION ON APPS AND GETTING AWAY WITH IT… BEING A URM, EVEN JUST BECAUSE YOU CHECKED A SILLY BOX THAT SHOULDN’T EVEN BE ON AN APPLICATION TO A HIGHER LEARNING INSTITUTION, (sorry I didn’t realize I was in caps D:) changes the way a college views you…and I can tell you this person was not just misinformed…she told me she did it because of the advantage it gave her over other applicants, almost verbatim</p>
<p>Please don’t come into this thread and give your hasty 2 cents without doing research…Look up the census def. of African American at least…</p>
<p>And the main reason I am obsessing over this is because I was in the same boat as her come application time…and I DID NOT check URM as it is obviously not the right thing to do… it’s really not even a question about fairness, it’s ethics and morals.</p>
<p>Are you sure she checked simply “Black” and not “African American”…? Not sure how the UC app works, but I know Commonapp clumps “Black or African American.” Though African America technically refers to people with origins in black populations of Africa, you can’t really blame a South African for checking African American. They have roots in Africa.</p>
<p>If you don’t think the race question should be on apps, you’re being a little shortsighted. The race question is essential to level the playing field, because certain races tend to be disadvantaged in the college admission process (due to average economic status, hardship, education, etc). It’s just not fair to compare a disadvantaged student directly to a non-disadvantaged student.</p>
<p>Though many members of these races are NOT disadvantaged, many are, which is why they end up being underrepresented in elite colleges. Those who are not disadvantaged are kinda taking advantage of the system, but they certainly aren’t in the wrong. The race question is important.</p>
<p>At the end of the day, do colleges consider South Africans to be African Americans? You could cite the Census and say no, but I can’t see a college saying “Wait a sec, you aren’t an African American, because your father is from the white part of Africa.” They might be technically correct, but I believe they must give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they culturally identify with AAs… Maybe not though>?</p>
Then it shouldn’t freaking be about race then. Make it about socioeconomic status. AA is the dumbest thing in the world.</p>
<p>Asians weren’t welcomed with open arms when they came to America. Yet they dealt with it and are successful now. Blacks and Mexicans can do the same.</p>
<p>@Karl, the URM advantage is not a solution to discrimination. Its a solution to level the playing field for disadvantaged applicants. </p>
<p>Discrimination would involve rejecting someone merely because of their race. This is NOT why certain races are underrepresented. Certain races are underrepresented because people of that race tend to be disadvantaged in the admission process due to hardship and economic status and whatnot. For example, the average SAT score of Hispanics is lower than that of Asians. That’s not by random chance; it’s because Hispanics, on average, tend to be disadvantaged compared to Asians.</p>
<p>@Nuclear, we were just discussing this on another topic. Yes, it should be about socioeconomic status. However, basing it on socioeconomic status would mean the wealthy (who make up a tiny portion of the US) would have to represent a small portion of the population in elite colleges, whereas the less wealthy students would be represented far more. In the end, colleges loose tons of money, from both tuition and alumni donations, and that’s not acceptable. Wealthy students would be fighting for far fewer spots and end up having a tougher time getting into schools- not a good thing when colleges <3 money.</p>
<p>“Race refers to classifications of humans into relatively large and distinct populations or groups often based on factors such as appearance based on heritable phenotypical characteristics or geographic ancestry, but also often influenced by and correlated with traits such as culture, ethnicity and socio-economic status”</p>
<p>If “race” includes geographic ancestry and culture traits, it would make sense that a white South African could still qualify as an African American, no? Ethnic groups as well are based on heritage and common culture. If the culture is shared, it would seem they could classify as AA, despite skin color.</p>