<p>Hi, collegebound. I also took your post to mean you want to use being black as a hook (and then you tossed in being queer). I am also a black mom of a HS junior daughter. There’s a ton of free material online that will help you prep for a higher score on the SAT (there’s a free practice test on collegeboard.com even and it ain’t easy based on my D’s first couple of passes through it). I bought my Ds SAT prep book online for $17 from Amazon, but get that perhaps you can’t afford the book because she wouldn’t have been able to afford the book if I didn’t buy it for her. Please don’t sell yourself short by using being black as a hook, just saying that’s how I read your post, and it’s like bees to honey for folks to hop on the ‘being black is not a hook’ soapbox like folks did here. Not sure how being openly gay helps in college admission unless you intend to essay on it.</p>
<p>BeStillMyHeart,</p>
<p>Traditional values are white? Are ethics and morality also white?</p>
<p>that’s pretty funny. I was going to write a long retort to that but I decided to let your words stand on their own.</p>
<p>Come on guys, take the debate off of this kid’s thread. Enough.</p>
<p>Ethics and morality aren’t white. Everybody have morals ( some people dont believe that but i do). I’m just saying if your “moral” excludes people of different races, sexual orientations, or how its wrong if somebody lifestyle is different from yours then I have a problem.</p>
<p>". Please don’t sell yourself short by using being black as a hook…"
Wait. On every decision thread it lists Hooks? (URM, first generation, legacy, etc./). So I don’t think thinking that in SOME circumstances being black, a URM, is a hook is so bad. Some schools need more URMs. The reasons for that are many but if they need them then why is it bad or selling yourself short to say it is a hook? If you are not relying on it solely, why is it bad. Heck, no one on here got up in arms months ago when a bunch of kids including me were applying to flyins that were for those with the ‘hook’ of being a URM.
Relying on it is bad. Being aware of it? How is that any different than being aware that being a legacy or first generation might be a hook or that being from Hawaii for a school in Maine might be a hook? I don’t get it.
So if a girl applies to West Point and knows that she may have a better chance getting in than a guy because they need girls but she still prepares hard and does not count on it, I honestly don’t get why that is bad?</p>
<p>I’ve talked with multiple independent college counselors about URM status and the bump you receive. Sadly, AAs receive approximately a 150 point bump on their SATs to account for discrepancies between the average AA SAT and the average SAT of caucasians. I say that’s sad because the gap is still unexplainable but it does exist.</p>
<p>So if you want to know how much being black helps, for planning purposes add 150 to your SAT scores and that’s what your normalized score would be for college admissions. </p>
<p>Also keep in mind that EVERY AA gets this bump so if Duke, for example admits 10% of it’s incoming class who are AAs, you still have less than 30% chance because you are competing against highly talented AAs from all over the country who are also getting the bump.</p>
<p>Yes there is a statistical advantage but don’t forget that kids all over the country who happened to be black are competing against you too.</p>
<p>The use of quotas is forbidden but “soft” quotas exist, IMHO. Thus, any bump you receive in admissions consideration is only in comparison to the rest of the non AA pools. If you’re admitted, a less-qualified AA was not admitted.</p>
<p>That’s the zero-sum game of things. It’s nothing to be upset about – that’s just how it is. You’re still in competition, don’t fail to forget that.</p>
<p>Thank you both.</p>
<p>Just to throw this out there (and to bring some positivity to this thread, I mean sheesh), I don’t know why we’re acting like a 29 ACT is SOOO far out of Cornell or Brown’s competitive pool. Browns 50% range for the ACT is a 29-34, while Cornell’s is a 30-33. Think about it: 1 out of every 4 acceptees get in to Brown with a 29 or lower. Collegebound definitely has a shot, though not a huge one. Remember though, NO ONE has a huge shot at a school like Brown or Cornell.</p>
<p>Thank you SkyRue :)</p>
<p>This thread is the bomb</p>
<p>Hmmm. A little hostility here. </p>
<p>No one here can predict the outcome of your applications, SkyRue. SAT’s are only a small part of the process. The range of accepted SAT’s at the nation’s premier colleges is broad. If you have a 29 ACT, your application will not be tossed in the trash before it is read. If there is enough substance to it, they will consider you for admission. On the other hand, the 29 is not going to help you in any way. But it won’t close the door. Remember that kids with 2300 SAT’s get turned down all the time. Look at the Brown admissions web site. They accepted 24.4% of the 36 ACT kids last year - rejected 75%. They rejected 82% of the valedictorians as well. The SAT is an imperfect tool that gives schools an idea what a 3.9 at one school means vs a 3.9 at another. If you have a 4.0 and a 1350 SAT (I have seen this, by the way), Princeton isn’t biting. All you need is to get the application read. If there is enough meat in there to impress an admissions officer, you have a chance.</p>
<p>These schools (the Ivy’s, Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, etc.) are looking for certain other things. They are not looking for a long list of trivial EC’s. What they are looking for, in addition to superb work in an academic environment, is unusually ambitious achievement outside of the school. Conservatory level musicians, published scientists, published authors, significant leadership beyond what any others are doing at the same high school age, are examples of what they want. If a kid is from a disadvantaged background, they want to see the drive to overcome those circumstances in a concrete, distinctive manner. </p>
<p>As for the hook: it is there. It is not a secret. If you are an African American student, the fact is that a lower SAT gets your application read. The distribution of scores for AA kids is lower at almost every college. You have to look at it in a much larger context, though.</p>
<p>Most schools do not want a homogenous student body of 2350 SAT kids of only 2 racial groups populating their campuses, nor do they want 100% premeds or 100% computer geeks. They want a distribution of unique and interesting kids - even if a few are computer geeks. If you are African American, gay, female, you speak Mandarin and play the tuba in the state youth symphony, you are going to get noticed.</p>
<p>The reasons for the racial differences in scores are complex enough that decades of scholarly articles have not defined all of the causes. Much of it probably falls into the economic and family tradition slots, but it is too much to discuss all of it here. I will say that the evidence is there to point at least one finger at SAT prep. SkyRue probably could have done more, but could she afford $140 an hour SAT prep tutors from Harvard, Stanford, and Pomona? I could, and my daughter raised her SAT 220 points over an eighteen month period. So she is going into the admissions cycle with one of the higher SAT scores that colleges will see from an AA student (but certainly not the highest). All of her Asian and white friends had similar tutors and expensive classes (well, except for one who got a 2400 his sophomore year, but there are always freaky smart kids lurking somewhere). Is that fair to a kid from South Central LA or Compton who barely knows anything about the entire admissions process? No. And a hugely disproportionate number of AA kids live in those circumstances. I think SkyRue has a point about the financial aspect of of the standardized test issue.</p>
<p>Why does a kid in South Central LA barely know anything about the admissions process??</p>
<p>Why does fairness come up in connection with this issue? How would you resolve the unfairness if you think its unfair for your middle or upper class child to have knowledge, skills and help that a kid in an impoverished, inner city, gang ridden neighborhood doesn’t have on hand?</p>
<p>This is an important topic because the truth is that it’s not about fairness. It’s about competitiveness. Some kids are playing a game of getting good grades, scoring well on tests, going to college and getting great jobs and living a good life. Other kids are playing an entirely different game. One where violence, neglect, drugs, unwed parenting and crappy education must be survived and where hope fades as they get older.</p>
<p>These kids aren’t competitive because they are playing a game that leads to failure. Kids from good neighborhoods generally absorb the rules of the game that will propel them into the middle class.</p>
<p>Fairness is among the worst ways of trying to come up with solutions because it means that you can just take their situation into consideration and give them an artificial boost based on race, income, first gen or whatever. That’s like a bandaid on hemorrhage. The question is how can we help inner city youth be more competitive? The answers to that will produce solutions to the real problems that impede generations of children and bring real hope back to kids in the American dream.</p>
<p>Just a general question but any opinions on using race as a hook?
I see many people using race as a distinguishing factor even though they are well financially.</p>
<p>You check the box and hope that is the feather on the scale that gets you in if it comes down to it. Ideally, race will just be a plus for the university since you were going to be accepted anyway.</p>
<p>I don’t understand what you mean about “using race” even though the family is well off. are you saying that at some income level blacks should not admit we are black? The story of racism extends to high income blacks just in different ways. some ignorant affluent whites have preconceived notions and question whether we belong in their socioeconomic class.</p>
<p>The struggle goes on. :)</p>
<p>@wherezwallace</p>
<p>By financially well I meant that with more wealth one has more access to a wide range of activities/opportunities.
Whether its money for extracurriculars, summer programs, etc colleges do factor that in too since they’d expect more from a person who is wealthier than one who isn’t.</p>
<p>I see your point though. We all face some form of adversity regardless of race or class.</p>
<p>@purified what do you mean “using race as a hook”? Students don’t write a paragraph in the additional section of the common app saying “remember I’m black!!! Accept me!!!” Everyone checks a box on the demographic section disclosing their race. Just because it gives some an advantage doesn’t mean it’s something they’re “using”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The are other ways for admissions to tell. (not that it matters). If one is a National Achievement semifinalist that’s a dead give away.</p>
<p>@collegebound</p>
<p>You over emphasized the word “using”. Maybe I didn’t make myself clear enough, but I was simply asking: how much can being a minority help you in the admissions process if you have a strong financial background?
Its one thing to be a minority and another to be an underrepresented minority. You cannot compare one with a low net income in poverty with one who is upper middle class or above. Wouldn’t universities expect more from the latter despite both being minorities?</p>