how much constitutes a minority

<p>"And how many of you would trade places to get the AA advantage?"</p>

<p>Frankly, of the upper class URMs that I know, I don't think any of them would trade places with me to gain whatever perceived 'white' advantage there might be. Most people are proud of their culture regardless of status, and there is no advantage that I can detect on either side within the same economic range. As many studies have pointed out, family income is a close predictor of SAT score, no matter what your race. I imagine the same can be said for GPA. </p>

<p>And yes, upper class URMs are given preference at almost every school over similar non-URMs. This isn't a condemnation, simply a fact. Some schools give similar preference to first generation college non-URMs, which makes very good sense.</p>

<p>If I don't already get the AA advantage (which seems debatable now, long story for those who don't know what I'm talking about), I would glady trade places with whoever does. I've been called names for looking (or being, depending on who you ask) white, so I don't see how much flack I'd get being on the other side. Especially if I were one of those upper class URMs that are being discussed. And although many believe that blacks still encounter heavy discrimination nowadays, how many Asians and Latinos can honestly say that they've been traumatized by the discrimination they've encountered solely because of their race? More Middle Easterners encounter discrimination, nowadays, and, from what I hear and admittedly assume, they are still not very high on URM list. AA is just one strange and confusing animal that I am frankly against. Equal means equal.</p>

<p>First of all, URM status is completely contingent upon what school one applies to. Are asians and some middle easterners hurt by AA? Yes, at the twenty or so Ivy league and similar reputable institutions that a multitude of them appy to. However, asians and middle easterners enjoy the benefits of AA at schools where there is a paucity of applicants from those particular ethnicities, especially in the south and midwest. White applicants receive preference at historically black and hispanic serving institutions. Some schools even give preference to certain religions. Vanderbilt suffers from a dearth of Jewish applicants and gives favor to qualified Jewish applicants.
Secondly, Lucifersam, how can you be for or against something you admittedly do not understand in respect to AA. There is a word for that and it is called ignorance.</p>

<p>Kirmum, don't believe for a second that upper-class URM's get <em>no</em> bump. More is expected than for lower-class URM's, sure. Otoh, the top private schools will very carefully ensure that their URM enrollment figures never go down if they can help it, as a matter of PR. The public schools are a little more constrained.</p>

<p>vicks546 - Upon reading your post, a red flag went up in my brain -- "Wait a second . . . most other people on here tell me that AA and URM status are dependent on eachother, and, furthermore, that AA was created as a reparation to those children or those children whose ancestors were encountered oppression as a result of their skin color!" . . . I figure that what you are speaking of throughout your post is a college's tendency to try to promote diversity so that it can earn them more points by college review boards as well as notoriety for just being very diverse. What am I to believe? Are you just as clueless about AA as I am? Or are a lot of other people on this board who claim that they are right, in the same way that you do, actually wrong? </p>

<p>Also, in regards to my apparent "ignorance" . . . As my last sentence of that post said, "Equal means equal." Whatever AA was truly made for or however it works, it does not seem to promote the principle of a person being reviewed for qualification based on actual qualification and it instead bases part of their qualifications on what color their skin is and who their parents are in regards to ethnicity and nationality. </p>

<p>There is a word for your calling me ignorant on account of what I said . . . I think that word is "obliviousness" or perhaps it is "irrationality" in that you are that quick to resort to name-calling because I say that I am against something that I admit I do not know all the rules to. You may be against abortion, but that does not mean that you know every single ramification of Roe v Wade . . . it means that you are aware of what abortion entails and produces and you do not like those sort of things.</p>

<p>Lucifer, a black man, no matter what his SES, knows what it's like to watch people in his path cross the street as he approaches. Statistics clearly show that for most jobs he has less of a chance than a white applicant with the same qualifications. Police are 20X as likely in LA to randomly pull over a black teenager driving a good car than a white one. And so on. Until you walk in my son's shoes, you will have no idea of the subtle things that just make life different for blacks. AA was not meant to be the lottery for someone who belatedly discovers they have some "blood," and it's somrthing that hasn't impacted their experience. I really doubt any college will see it any other way.</p>

<p>Thedad, no doubt that URMs are given extra attention. My son, a private school URM, did not initially get into top UCs with average (for them) stats in spite of all the accusations all over this site. Many URMs we know who are highly qualified are not gliding into top schools in the way many suppose. Still a tip factor? I think so. But hardly the 1200/3.2 into Harvard that so many assume.</p>

<p>In the Brief file at the Supreme Court, by Harvard University, Brown University, The University Of Chicago, Dartmouth College, Duke University, The University Of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, And Yale University As Amici Curiae Supporting Respondents</p>

<p><a href="http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/briefs/03-02-17-harvard.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/briefs/03-02-17-harvard.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>These schools collectively stated</p>

<p>Academically selective universities have a compelling interest in ensuring that their student bodies incorporate the experiences and talents of the wide spectrum of racial and ethnic groups that make up our society. Amici should be free to compose a class that brings together many different kinds of students; that includes robust representation of students from different races and ethnicities; and that prepares graduates to work successfully in a diverse nation. Indeed, highly selective universities have long defined as one of their central missions the training of the nation’s business, government, academic, and professional leaders. By creating a broadly diverse class, amici’s admissions policies help to assure that their graduates are well prepared to succeed in an increasingly complex and multi-racial society.</p>

<p>The colleges presented the following arguments</p>

<p>I- Consideration Of Race And Ethnicity In An Individualized Admissions Process Serves Compelling Interests.</p>

<p>A. There Is a Broad Consensus On The Important Educational Benefits of Diversity.
Diversity helps students confront perspectives other than their own and thus to think more rigorously and imaginatively; it helps students learn to relate better to people
from different backgrounds; it helps students become better citizens. The educational benefits of student diversity include the discovery that there is a broad range of viewpoint and experience within any given minority community – as well as learning that certain imagined differences at times turn out to be only skin deep. It is surely fitting for universities to undertake to prepare their students to live and work in a global economy within a multiracial world. The challenges of contemporary life demand that students acquire not just traditional forms of knowledge regarding science and the arts, but also techniques of bridging differences in perspective and in personal experience.</p>

<p>B. Consideration of Race and Ethnicity Grows Naturally Out Of The Needs Of The Professions and Of American Business.</p>

<p>Every major profession in this country has sought greater diversity within its ranks.4 Businesses have demanded more minority managers and executives, as well as non-minorities who can work well with colleagues from diverse backgrounds.
Leading corporations, business groups, professional organizations, and executives have repeatedly called for consideration of race and ethnicity in university admissions.5 In
adopting their admissions policies, universities are responding to “the clearly articulated needs of business and the professions for a healthier mix of well-educated leaders and practitioners from varied racial and ethnic backgrounds.</p>

<p>The Interest In Racial Diversity Cannot Be Served By Race-Neutral Reliance On Factors, Such As Economic Disadvantage, That Are Already Carefully Considered.</p>

<p>The United States urges (as one solution) that universities look to such factors as special economic hardship instead of race. See U.S. Grutter Br. 24-25. But the decisive fact
is that all of the suggested race-neutral factors, and many more besides, already enter into admissions decisions. Consideration of those factors alone does not achieve the distinctly racial diversity that amici seek in their student bodies. To accomplish that goal, admissions committees must give favorable consideration to minority race in addition to those other factors, not instead of them.</p>

<p>By deliberately tilting individual admissions toward “hardship” students in the hope of thereby selecting a large enough increment of minority students to make up for the
losses that would result from race-blind admissions – would be disingenuous at best. Such an approach would in truth be a race based policy and not a race-neutral alternative at all. Indeed, such programs, if adopted to assure increased minority enrollment, would be based on race in a causal sense and would thus raise obvious constitutional questions of their own.</p>

<p>A race-neutral preference for economically disadvantaged students, for example, would admit many more whites than non-whites, because of sheer demographic realities.14 And, of course, the university interest in admitting minority students goes well beyond just admitting minority students from disadvantaged backgrounds.</p>

<p>Race-Conscious Admissions Programs Are Not Open- Ended Commitments.</p>

<p>The decision of a university as to which minority groups deserve favorable consideration in an individualized admissions process designed to foster such diverse representation, and the weight of such consideration, are necessarily and appropriately decisions to be made as a matter of educational judgment, taking into account both the university’s sense of its mission and its best estimate of the leadership needs it will address – not as a matter
of conflicting “rights.”</p>

<p>The colleges also state that they</p>

<p>are not so far removed from the days when segregation by race in education,
and race discrimination in all sorts of vital opportunities relevant to educational performance, were for many a matter of law.</p>

<p>dukedreamer = MAJORITY of schools do not require a tribal registration. i am from arizona, being one of the top states populated with native americans. i have a few friends who had this problem in the past and discovered that the majority of schools dont even ask u to verify ur claim, of course u should be honest. usually u have to be at least 1/16 to be allowed to gain native american minority status</p>

<p>many native americans "look" white. what are they expecting? if they are allowing people that are 1/8 or 1/16 to check the box they shouldnt be expecting to see a person that looks 100% native american. most native americans that apply to college today arent full blooded. my friend that received harvard admission last year was 1/4th native american and looked pure white since majority of his blood was english. dont let this get to u. ur interviewer and what not wont question u about ur heritage. they probably wont even know that u checked native american. They usually only get a list of names, addresses, and phone numbers.</p>

<p>Kirmum, I think URM's receive less of a bump at UC's overall compared to other, private institutions. UC's as a group are more numbers driven, though not completely, and the exceptions tend to be more economics based than anything else, supporting your take on things.</p>

<p>I think it comes down to what you consider yourself. If you can say I'm native Indian/American, and truly are connected to that culture, write it down, but if not, I would write both ethnicities</p>

<p>as an african-american (middle-class) I wouldn't trade spots- all of us have a unique culture and why would you ever want to lose that</p>

<p>Duke, to me a URM would be somebody with immediate links to that certain race. By going that far back, you would have technically lost all links to that heritage. Just like you, a way way far time ago, a native american married into my family- however I really have no genetics that can be said similar to the tribe that he came from. To most places, the 'legal' minority status would be to have at least one parent from that ethnicity.</p>

<p>I knew someone that put he was native american cause he was alos like 1/8 or something...and they gave him a scholarship but to receive it he had to live in this indian house on campus</p>

<p>has anyone heard of a Roman patrician clan, the Claudians? There was a guy Publius Claudius Pulcher who adopted himself into a plebeian branch of his family to attain the non-aristocratic spelling "clodius" for his nomen (in the middle, corresponds to our last name). He then became tribune of the plebs despite his patrician ancestry which he denied at all costs and among other things exiled Cicero.</p>

<p>"but to receive it he had to live in this indian house on campus"</p>

<p>Segregation, much? lol</p>

<p>I am 1/4 Hispanic (grandmother is from Chile), but there is no such thing as tribal affilliation with Hispanics. Nevertheless, I can provide my grandmother's birth certificate, naturalization papers, Chilean passport...you name it, and I can provide the proof. I don't think anyone will ask me to provide proof, however,
Interestingly, my Chilean grandmother passed away before I was born so I never knew her. Yet, we visit 2 great-aunts and second cousins who still live in Chile so I feel tied to my culture.
I am totally white..and my Chilean great-grandparents immigrated to to Chile from Europe. But, being HIspanic is about being of a certain ethnicity. One can be of any race and still be HIspanic.
So, when the time comes, I will proudly indicate that I am Hispanic. Due to my visits to Chile, language programs and study abroad, I am almost fluent in Spanish.
I hope no one will have a problem with that!</p>

<p>I'm in the same place as you are, Pennlegacy-- 1/4 hispanic, yet I am a Yale and Columbia legacy. I have spent months at language programs in Mexico and learned Spanish in elementary school. My grandmother came here from Mexico as a child. I am debating whether to write Hispanic on my applications because I haven't received any hardship from being Hispanic, and isn't that the point of Afirmative Action? , but at the same time I look very Hispanic.</p>

<p>Pennlegacy, if you look caucasian (I'm assuming you do) are colleges going to be suspicious during interviews? That seems like that would be a difficult aspect. Colleges might think that you are just marking hispanic to get an admissions boost. </p>

<p>Will being Hispanic in the case of a legacy give anyone any advantage?</p>

<p>My grandmother was born and raised in Chile. She didn't come to the US until she was 28. My grandfather lived in South America for many years which is where he met my grandmother. Therefore, my dad grew up in a Spanish speaking home and is fluent in Spanish (my grandfather is not Hispanic).
Being Hispanic is not about being of a certain "look", although many people in the US interpret it that way. People in Spain are Hispanic and there are quite a few blondes over there. People in Argentina and Chile are mostly descended from European ancestors.
I'm not disadvantaged either, but then again, there is a Hispanic kid at my school with a REAL Hispanic surname and first name (Carlos). He is wealthy, both his parents are physicians. He is definitely not disadvantaged. There are successful Hispanics out there.
It's a tough decision. I still have some ties to Chile with relatives there. Do you still have ties to Mexicao since your grandmother came here as a baby?
When I travel to Chile, everyone there thinks I'm Chilean. I fit in with my dark hair and eyes, but my skin is not really dark.</p>

<p>I'm only 1/8 Hispanic and I wrote on my PSAT that I was Hispanic. My National Hispanic Scholar recognition was taken away after I asked my college counselor to inform them about how I was only 1/8. 1/4 is the requirement for that, so I'm sure you'd be fine only marking Hispanic on college apps. But if you're concerned about it, just mark all that apply to you. That's what I'm doing. I'd be denying part of my heritage if I didn't. My grandma who's 1/2 Mexican has played a big part in my life and has always exposed me to the Mexican culture, whether she wanted to or not. (Her mother's family was "Spanish"...if you go back 500 years. :p)</p>

<p>for those of you who are 1/4 hispanic but feel hesitant to say, i would repeat what someone else said earlier: if you identify with the culture (which i think you said you did) and you feel that you can bring a different perspective to the campus then go ahead, put it down, regardless of how light your skin color is. (by the way, hispanic/ latino is not a race, there are categories for white and non white latinos, so your white skin isnt an issue)</p>

<p>If you've never considered yourself a minority...don't be cheap and put it on your college application...that's not the right way to do things</p>