I wish I weren't Asian

<p>
[quote]
Some people here seem to be woefully ignorant of the fact that Asians have been in the US as early as the 1600s (granted, Asians didn't arrive in the US in significant nos. until the 1800s).

[/quote]
The point concerned when Asians came to settle in the area now known as the Continental United States, since that is where slavery first began in the "American" region. Asians were not there to suffer that injustice. Blacks were.</p>

<p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/21h.153j/www/chrono.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.mit.edu/21h.153j/www/chrono.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.pbs.org/ancestorsintheamericas/time_06.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.pbs.org/ancestorsintheamericas/time_06.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.infoplease.com/spot/asiantimeline1.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.infoplease.com/spot/asiantimeline1.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_American#Asian_American_history%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_American#Asian_American_history&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.asian-nation.org/first.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.asian-nation.org/first.shtml&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www3.niu.edu/ptaa/history.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www3.niu.edu/ptaa/history.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Plus, Asians had to deal with miscenegation laws, exclusion laws (immigration), not to mention laws excluding them from owning property or working in certain fields/professions.

[/quote]
Of course bad things did happen to Asians. They happened to Germans, to Jews, to the Irish. None of these groups were veritably created by theft and subjugation themselves.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Nevertheless, Asian-Ams don't need anyone's feeling of "indebtedness" since in general, they can more than compete academically/activities-wise (tho, there are groups of Asians with disadvantaged backgrounds, particularly, SE Asians who get shanked in the admissions process, just as most people from disadvantaged backgrounds do).

[/quote]
The issue does not even concern ā€œdisadvantageā€. If it were only that, then there would be no problem. Asians donā€™t need anyoneā€™s feeling of indebtedness because they have no cause for it. As a group, they came here as entrepreneurs, seeking better lives. They came with hope and, largely they are getting what they came for. Blacks were created here by theft, and then deliberately denied the chance to build themselves for nearly the entire time they have been here. This happened by colonial and then American law. No other group has experienced this.</p>

<p>
[quote]
However, it would be nice if Asian-Ams had an "even-playing field".

[/quote]
The field is as even for them as it has been for everyone else. It was very hard for Jews, for Italians, for the Irish, and now for Hispanics and Asians. Racism affected all of these groups. Unfairness has affected members of all of them. That is not the issue. Had it only been that, there would be no problem today because blacks would have developed their own institutions just as all other groups have done, and then gradually integrated into the larger society. They were unable to do this because they were stopped cold by law, first in slavery, then by Jim Crow, and now by the results of those atrocious institutions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
That sounds A LOT like punishment to me. And, how is 9/11 in any way connected to American slavery and segregation?

[/quote]
It is not punishment when you can choose not to have it. The point is, whether we want it or not, if we are in America, we are going to pay the price of slavery, and it is going to continue until the full debt is paid. It is possible, I think, to pay this in a civilized way, by first acknowledging that this group suffers because of the past, that it now doubts its own country because of the past, and seeking ways to help them get back what was stolen. No one can give it to them. I am certain they are going to have to do it themselves. But, if one of them should rise to meet the academic standard of a school, despite history, it causes no harm to anyone to select him. He is good. So select him.

[quote]
That's why I highlighted the word idea in my sentence. One parent obviously misunderstood the simulated aspect of the Chung and Espenshade study. She then boldly proclaimed her support for such an idea.

[/quote]
I see. The problem here is that this is entirely irrelevant to what these policies really mean. Yeah. I donā€™t support the idea of just giving a black guy 200 points. I donā€™t think most folks support such a thing. So we ought not use this misunderstanding as a strawman in this discussion.</p>

<p>
[quote]
...except that race is factored in. Even as one of many factors, there's no point for it to be used.

[/quote]
The point is, once again, to raise the odds of finding the relatively few blacks who are qualified. The chance of finding them is very low in a race-blind society. The reason it is low is due to the fact that blacks have incurred the worst affects of a race-conscious society, even incurring the loss of the ownership of their own bodies and lives. Because of that, race now has immense importance everywhere. If you really want a race-blind society, there are plenty other areas where we might start.</p>

<p>
[quote]
When race is used as a factor, people are judged on the color of their skin. I'm against this.

[/quote]
Me too. But people are always judging on the color of the skin. It is just everywhere. Why donā€™t we start nailing racism where it actually hurts blacks, since you are so eager to kill racism? When we take care of that, then we can work on this admissions stuff. I think most of us want to deal with the admissions stuff not because of some moral principle. We want to deal with it for other reasons.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Drosselmeier, while I seriously disagree with some of your views, I don't have anything against you personally. I just don't think that we should make judgments based on race.

[/quote]
Same here. I think we ought not make these judgments either. But since we are making them all the time, I think we should make them on the few areas where they can actually do some good, especially since no one is being ā€œpunishedā€ by it.</p>

<p>Fabrizio - my comments are not just based on my professional experience. They are also based on observations I have made of teachers, students, and guidance counselors in hundreds of high schools. They are based on countless hours doing educational and demographic research while getting my masters in education with a focus on public policy and college access at Harvard University. And they are based on the countless hours I have served as a volunteer college counselor for underpriviliged kids at lousy high schools. </p>

<p>Culturally relevant - well, Fabrizio, since you've lived in a bunch of different places, I assume that you can understand that different people - depending on where the grow up, who they grow up around, what social and cultural norms they experience, and what kind of teachers they have in school - speak and understand "proper English" very differently. And just because you've had the privilege of being taught perfect English conjugation doesn't mean everyone else has!!! I have to say, having lived in the Mid-Atlantic, New England, the Deep South, and on the West Coast, I can assure everyone else out there that not everyone in this country has had the privilege of being taught perfect English. Also, the SAT has historically come under fire because many of its questions - particularly on the verbal portion of the test - often talk about things that are only relevant to caucasian-Americans. Analogies, for example, can be very racially or culturally biased. That's why ETS removed them from the test recently and is looking at the way they phrase other types of questions in different sections! Also, for students who speak English as a second language, the SAT can be incredibly difficult for them and "score" them in a way that does not accurately represent their ability to learn; additionally, students who immigrate to this country and have never encountered a test like the SAT can be at a disadvantage because the format is so unfamiliar to them compared to what they were used to in their old home country. And BTW - your reference to ebonics is not cool...especially in this forum. </p>

<p>The SAT tutor - there are way more kids in the applicant pools at highly selective colleges who have taken these courses than you can imagine...and because the ETS itself and Kaplan have acknowledged that the test is "prep-able," I think it's fair to say that those students who don't take these course can be at a disadvantage in these applicant pools. Also, many of these prep classes are not offered at predominantly URM high schools or in their neighborhoods...check out your local phonebook...</p>

<p>Bowen and Bok chose the schools they used in The Shape of the River because they were all part of the "College and Beyond" - one of the most comprehensive educational databases available to education researchers. This database contains statistical, educational, and demographic information on over 45,000+ college students and their educational outcomes. Bowen and Bok grouped the schools together in the way they did so as to compare schools with similar selectivities - thus, schools with similar admit rates, average SAT scores for incoming freshmen, and average GPAs for incoming freshmen were grouped together - the groupings had nothing to do with the size of the institutions because this is not relevant to the study. If you read the methodological sections of the Shape of the River (and the rest of it) you will understand this better, and thus also understand how and why The Shape of the River - which by many who study higher education is considered a bible - is an academic piece and not a political one. Your assertion to the contrary is absurd - this work is based on statistical evidence and factual outcomes, not political fiction, whether you care to believe it or not. </p>

<p>And Fabrizio, everything you have said is zero sum - you speak in such absolute terms that it's almost possible for me to believe that you really do think we in admissions use race and only race to make our decisions. And you're wrong about college access only being about A college and not THE college - look at Caroline Hoxby's "The Return of Attending a More Selective College: 1960 to the Present" to understand this more. After controlling for many different factors like race, gender, GPAs, SATs, and cohort date (which other researchers who've chimed in on this debate like Stacey Dale and Alan Kreuger do not do), Hoxby presents pretty concrete statistical and qualitative evidence to support the claim that where you go to school does really matter.</p>

<p>My last word to you Fabrizio about this because I don't think you are being open-minded here...I agree with you that racial preferences are not the only way to improve social inequalities in this country. However, considering that white-Americans have been benefiting from racial preferences for centuries, I'm not exactly sure we can begrudge African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Native-Americans, and Latino-Americans their fair shot at the prize...we need to balance the playing field and ignoring race in trying to do so will set us back more than it will advance us. Best of luck to you in your college search...</p>

<p>dbean...these are for you...my apologies for not explicitly including Asian-Americans in some parts of my arguments. You are very right to imply that SE Asian-American students - particularly students with Vietnamese, Laotian, and Cambodian backgrounds are under-represented in our elite colleges. However, everyone I know who works in highly selective admissions is very conscious of this and their numbers are growing at this schools - and fast. However, your assessment of Jews in American higher education is somewhat off base and your tone when writing about them - whether you believe it or not or even realize it - is very hostile in my opinion. </p>

<p>Your use of Harvard as an example is relevant, and I agree with your point that more should be done for lower-income students at that school and others...but I do applaud them for getting the ball rolling and continuing to work hard at finding more of these students. In fact, that's precisely why I work in admissions and a big part of what I do at my institution. However, again, check your facts, or rather, update them...you state the vast majority of students attending elite institutions are upper-middle class or "elite"...this simply is not true and is changing every year. For example, over 50% of the students who are at Brown University are receiving need-based grant aid; this is a dramatic increase from the 37% that received need-based grant aid under a decade ago. At Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Williams, Rice, Dartmouth, Northwestern, Pomona, Columbia, and Grinnell, these numbers are similar. Families with incomes of over $150,000/year are qualifying for need-based grant aid at these schools, but these families usually have more than one student in college at a time. The socioeconomic "elite" at these schools is shrinking. And at many of these schools, the "vast majority" of students are not white. At Columbia, 48% of the entering freshman identified as students of color; at Pomona, nearly 50% of the student body are students of color; at Stanford, the incoming class this year is 55% students of color. And these numbers continue to rise at these schools and most of the elite colleges in the United States. And please, let's consider the fact that under 5% of the American population is Asian-American, yet Asian-Americans are roughly 23% of the incoming class at Stanford; 19% of the incoming class at Princeton; 17% at Northwestern; 26.5% at Wellesley...I could go on. So, are Asian-Americans, in general, being under-represented at these schools? </p>

<p>And as far as I'm concerned, you are blurring the line between race and ethnicity here. Asian-Americans are of Asian decent; Jewish-Americans are of Jewish decent. That's race (if you define the Jews as their own race). Chinese-Americans, American Jews, Japanese-Americans, Egyptian Jews...these are ethnicities...and I can argue that Jews are just as diverse as Asians are ethnically - there are black Jews, Asian Jews, Latino Jews, white Jews, Native American Jews, French Jews, Spanish Jews, Lebanese Jews, Egyptian Jews, Venezuelan Jews...I could continue. </p>

<p>I certainly was not trying to bore you with a lecture, and I would certainly be interested in speaking more about the systematic, deliberate, and blatantly racist exclusion of Jews in elite American higher education, considering I clocked in over 125 hours researching this topic in the archives at Harvard, Princeton and Yale and worked closely with one of this country's foremost experts of Jews in American higher education. And dedicated over 35 pages of my thesis work to it. But that's really here nor there...what's really important here is that you seem to think that people are ignorant to the abuse, exclusion, and discrimination that Asian-Americans have faced in this country. Well, most of the folks I've worked with in admissions at various schools are not ignorant to this fact...but we're also not ignorant to the fact that Asian-Americans, when considering the size of their population in this country, are over-represented in our "elite" colleges. And while I would agree with you that Jewish-Americans are over-represented with respect to their numbers in the American population, there has been a serious backlash against these students in the admissions offices at many schools recently; these students are being excluded consciously because of worries that there are "too many" of them at these schools and are very, very blatantly being held to a higher standard than anyone else. I've witnessed this personally in several admissions offices in the northeast; I've yet to see this with any other students. I feel like you are speaking and reacting out of personal frustration and, believe me, I can in many ways see several of the points you are making, but I strongly disagree with you that Jews are somehow being privileged in the admissions process at elite institutions (and I've got no personal stake here - I'm not Jewish). What is happening to some Jewish applicants in the admission process at some schools is conscious and blatant and everyone seems to be okay with it or ignoring it; I don't see Asian-Americans being treated this way - or any other groups being treated this way...</p>

<p>And, that is not what AdOfficer is saying. ^^^^</p>

<p>
[quote]
It's not a zero sum game.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Thanks to a few posters, this thread has become...a train wreck.</p>

<p>Sorry, AdOfficer...for all CCer's, and our sometimes unsavory behavior and huge egos.</p>

<p>Anyway, let's go back to congratulating the OP on a job well done...shall we?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, the SAT has historically come under fire because many of its questions - particularly on the verbal portion of the test - often talk about things that are only relevant to caucasian-Americans.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If theyā€™re only relevant to Whites, then why does the data show that Asians arenā€™t affected by such test bias, cultural irrelevance, and [insert excuse here]?</p>

<p>
[quote]

Also, for students who speak English as a second language, the SAT can be incredibly difficult for them and "score" them in a way that does not accurately represent their ability to learn; additionally, students who immigrate to this country and have never encountered a test like the SAT can be at a disadvantage because the format is so unfamiliar to them compared to what they were used to in their old home country.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Based on my experience, the only section that immigrants have problems with is the critical reading section. Even then, many of my friends who emigrated here have done very, very well on that section.</p>

<p>
[quote]

And BTW - your reference to ebonics is not cool...especially in this forum.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I asked what ā€œcultural relevanceā€ meant. Iā€™m not going to censor myself due to unnecessary political correctness.</p>

<p>
[quote]

The SAT tutor - there are way more kids in the applicant pools at highly selective colleges who have taken these courses than you can imagine...and because the ETS itself and Kaplan have acknowledged that the test is "prep-able," I think it's fair to say that those students who don't take these course can be at a disadvantage in these applicant pools. Also, many of these prep classes are not offered at predominantly URM high schools or in their neighborhoods...check out your local phonebook...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The test is definitely prep-able. I do not contest that. I bought the Blue Book and used xiggiā€™s advice. The book itself cost me around $10 (c.f. the hundreds [thousands?] I would have had to pay for a Kaplan or PR course). There are no tutors where I live. The closest ones are an hour away.</p>

<p>
[quote]

ā€¦ the groupings had nothing to do with the size of the institutions because this is not relevant to the study.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I donā€™t think so, and I agree with Dr. Sowellā€™s assessment that the only conclusion Shape of the River gives is ā€œthat black students graduate at a slightly higher rate from much smaller colleges than from larger colleges, at least within a highly unrepresentative sample of black students attending highly unrepresentative colleges.ā€</p>

<p>
[quote]

ā€¦ which by many who study higher education is considered a bible

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It has many features of a Bible, as well. Despite its methodological flaws and limitations, it is taken as truth with little or no criticism. The criticism that exists is ignored.</p>

<p>
[quote]

And Fabrizio, everything you have said is zero sum - you speak in such absolute terms that it's almost possible for me to believe that you really do think we in admissions use race and only race to make our decisions. And you're wrong about college access only being about A college and not THE college - look at Caroline Hoxby's "The Return of Attending a More Selective College: 1960 to the Present" to understand this more. After controlling for many different factors like race, gender, GPAs, SATs, and cohort date (which other researchers who've chimed in on this debate like Stacey Dale and Alan Kreuger do not do), Hoxby presents pretty concrete statistical and qualitative evidence to support the claim that where you go to school does really matter.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Didnā€™t you write in post #137 that ā€ A final point - there are hundreds of good colleges and universities out there!ā€</p>

<p>Isnā€™t that contradictory to your statement that ā€œTHE collegeā€ matters?</p>

<p>This is what I mean what I talk about double standards. Asians are told that there are other options beyond HYPS. Why arenā€™t these ā€œother optionsā€ suggested to other ethnic groups? Why is it that for these other groups ā€œTHE collegeā€ matters?</p>

<p>
[quote]

ā€¦ we need to balance the playing field and ignoring race in trying to do so will set us back more than it will advance us. Best of luck to you in your college search...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ai, ā€œbalance the playing field?ā€ Where does this train of thought end, anyway? If you really want a level playing field, why donā€™t you encourage Iranā€™s nuclear program? Iā€™m sure weā€™ll have a really level playing field when their program is finished.</p>

<p>If you truly want to create a more equitable society, favoring others by race isnā€™t the way to do it. There should be more investment at the national level to schools that need it the most. If we can waste billions on a fruitless war in the Middle East, Iā€™m sure we can allocate some money to education, where it would be better used.</p>

<p>Thanks for the wish.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you truly want to create a more equitable society, favoring others by race isnā€™t the way to do it. There should be more investment at the national level to schools that need it the most. If we can waste billions on a fruitless war in the Middle East, Iā€™m sure we can allocate some money to education, where it would be better used.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, it would require that people FIRST drop making judgements about others and who is more qualified. That does not happen when it comes to selective college admssions unless they use the holistic approach which encompasses gender, grades, special talent, income, ethnicity, geographic location, recs, essays, et al. By ignoring gender or ethnicity, you are being discriminatory.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If theyā€™re only relevant to Whites, then why does the data show that Asians arenā€™t affected by such test bias, cultural irrelevance, and [insert excuse here]?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They are affected by it, as SAT data suggest that Math scores tend to be higher than verbal (CR and/or W) one. Also, Hawaii's sub-scores, show that there is little difference between Asians and everyone else. Significant because Asians are in the majority. The relationship of high scores and Asians do not hold in that state particularly. In fact, Asian test takers sometimes score lower than URMs in the US overall.</p>

<p>Also see the next quote, since you modify what you say about Asians not beeing affected score wise.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Based on my experience, the only section that immigrants have problems with is the critical reading section. Even then, many of my friends who emigrated here have done very, very well on that section.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When predicting first-year performance, colleges weigh the CR more heavily than the math. Thus, immigranst, even if some of them have very good total scores might have a large, statistically significant difference between M and CR. Colleges do consider an immigrants time in the US when looking at candidates. And, they do look at score differences that are not recent immigrants. Call all your admissions offices. It's CR, more than math (except at certain schools like MIT, CIT, RPI, WPI, etc...) and grades that colleges look to...so sometimes Asians who are not recent immigrants are affected. Based on my experience, my immigrant friends do significantly better on the math portion unless they are from affluent families (where there is still a difference but it is less extreme). My friends that are 3rd, 4th, and 5th generation still have a gap in their scores that favor math...though their composite scores are sometimes NOT as high as 2nd & 3rd generation Americans.</p>

<p>Again, it is the selective nature of the admissions process that you seem to have a problem with, seeing as you are advocating for a different kind of exclusion (more stats based). That would still be discrimination. How does that solve the inequity with respect to competitive private school admissions?</p>

<p>AdOfficer:</p>

<p>I really appreciate this post and it rings true to me. As the parent of a very hard-working student who is also a pretty serious athlete I can attest to the incredible hours of practices, workouts and games in addition to a truely rigorous academic program (IB Dipoloma). It's nice to know that admissions committees take that into account in the same way community service, arts, etc. are considered. In fact, my son was worried that he didn't have "enough" community service hours to impress admissions committees, but chose not to pad his resume with things he wasn't passionate about. In the end he got accepted to his first choice school, even though he won't be a varsity athlete there.</p>

<p>One caveat to what I've written: I do take issue with situations like those at Auburn University that graduate star athletes by changing grades without the knowledge of professors. This degrades the value of the degree for everyone.</p>

<p>"A final point - there are hundreds of good colleges and universities out there!ā€</p>

<p>The "there are hundreds of good colleges out there" approach could apply to URMs as easily as it does to whites and Asians. Yes, there are hundreds of good schools out there, but why should acting on this fact not apply to URMs in their college selection? People are quick to advise Asians to accept one of the excellent outlying schools; why does that not apply to URMs as well?</p>

<p>Here's the Hawaii SAT data:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2006/hawaii-2006.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2006/hawaii-2006.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
The "there are hundreds of good colleges out there" approach could apply to URMs as easily as it does to whites and Asians. Yes, there are hundreds of good schools out there, but why should acting on this fact not apply to URMs in their college selection? People are quick to advise Asians to accept one of the excellent outlying schools; why does that not apply to URMs as well?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That does apply to other URMs...they are advised to look for schools that have lower percentages of URMs because they would (like Asians) recieve a bump in the admissions process depending on the institutional objectives. Along the same lines, those who live in other geographic regions/states are advised to look outside their region, where they have a better chance. Men and women are told to look for schools where the male/female ratio are skewed to the opposite sex. Athletes are counseled to consider Division III schools, even if they want a Division I college. Those who are low-meduim income are asked to choose financial aid safeties. Affluent kids are told to apply to schools that give out merit aid. Low scores on the SAT are sometimes advised to look at colleges that are test optional....</p>

<p>My point is that a URM applies to a school at which his gpa and SATs would normally get him rejected if he were white or Asian, and the college bends over backwards, re-defines the word "qualified," trots out every half-baked diversity theory, and ignores the Thomas Sowells of the world to relieve their white guilt and get him in. Why can't they say, "You know, there are hundreds of good colleges in the country; why don't you find one in which your credentials will put you in a better position to excel"?</p>

<p>
[quote]
My point is that a URM applies to a school at which his gpa and SATs would normally get him rejected if he were white or Asian, and the college bends over backwards, re-defines the word "qualified," trots out every half-baked diversity theory, and ignores the Thomas Sowells of the world to relieve their white guilt and get him in.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, the schools (not sure if you're speaking of public/private or both) do not re-define qualified. They still look at geography, gender, recs, essays, special talent, ethnicity, legacy status, test scores, et al. And, the Spupreme Court, as well as the Federal Courts have stated through their rulings that diversity is a social good--that it can be used (as long as there is not a set quota) to craft a class at public schools like UMichigan. Half-baked? Hardly.</p>

<p>As for white guilt, interesting term. The majority of CA, TX, MI voters, who last time I checked were mostly white, voted for policies that would exclude the use of ethnicity--hardly white guilt.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Why can't they say, "You know, there are hundreds of good colleges in the country; why don't you find one in which your credentials will put you in a better position to excel"?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They do say that... and they stress fit. Judging by some posts on CC...students sometimes do not follow their advice, applying instead to colleges that are reaches, not picking safeties, fixating on one institution, not considering fit, etc...</p>

<p>Because credentials (and how each of the thousands of schools define them) do not tell the whole (or, if you prefer, holistic) story. Without a holistic process that includes socioeconomic, ethnicity, gender consideration et al, disadvantaged applicants would be marginalized during college admissions to a competitive college. Thus, a recent immigrant with low CR and W scores is sometimes given a break, while an affluent East Asian is not. Likewise, socioeconomically disadvantaged non-minorities are given a bit of a break, while well-heeled applicants without legacy status or developemental potential are not. Without a holistic process that considers personal background, inequity would grow.</p>

<p>All good GC do talk about whether an applicant falls in the middle-50% with respect to scores, where their gpa is going to help or hurt them, where they will get merit aid, which schools consider rank very importan or not, etc...</p>

<p>And there will aways be a bottom and top decile in any first-year class. The move from using mean scores to the middle-50% scores was meant as a tool to see if an applicant is competitive for a particular school...it was not meant to show that 25% of the class is 'unqualified', private selective colleges generally accept students who they feel can do the work, as well as meet the goals of the institution--whatever that maybe--without breaking any laws.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If theyā€™re only relevant to Whites, then why does the data show that Asians arenā€™t affected by such test bias, cultural irrelevance, and [insert excuse here]?

[/quote]
I think it is because of a confluence of cultural pressures that, though affecting all non-white groups, affect Asians least of all. Many Asian groups, for example, have little aversion to whiteness. In fact they seem to aspire to whiteness, having far fewer antagonisms against it than nearly all other non-white groups. Where Asians do this openly, blacks who even think of such a thing are harshly ridiculed.</p>

<p>*Life is good for Lucy Hao. She has a part-time job as a freelance writer, an apartment in Beijing, and her 15 minutes of fame has stretched into weeks as journalists document her transformation.</p>

<p>She has become a living billboard for cosmetic procedures in China, going from this pre-surgery look to this four months and 12 operations later. Lucy now has a higher nose and eyes that are larger and rounder. Doctors removed the fold in her eyelid to give her a more European look.*
<a href="http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/05/i_ins.01.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/05/i_ins.01.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.synovate.com/current/news/article/2004/06/asian-women-in-pursuit-of-white-skin.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.synovate.com/current/news/article/2004/06/asian-women-in-pursuit-of-white-skin.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/08/07/MNGJSE3CL21.DTL&feed=rss.news%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/08/07/MNGJSE3CL21.DTL&feed=rss.news&lt;/a>
<a href="http://skingeek.com/ingredients/complications/skinwhiteningdangers.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://skingeek.com/ingredients/complications/skinwhiteningdangers.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>The Asian cultures seem far more eager to accept whiteness than blacks here in this country. Hispanics, Africans, Native-Americans, and blacks, due to many historical pressures created by European colonialism and tyranny, and by varying degrees, recoil from such a thing. Blacks probably recoil most of all so that even should a black person learn ā€œwhiteā€ English, he is ridiculed. Many blacks who see the need to learn standard English even think they must also maintain black English so they can ā€œkeep it realā€. They do not seem to realize that such a thing can be an impediment to their childrenā€™s growth in our societal context, since black English was created historically to oppress them. Asians are free to learn English just as they learn math. They may not even speak standard English, but approach it technically, as they would any other subject. That sort of approach is just offlimits to large parts of the black community. It has always been offlimits to blacks, first by law, then by an intense culture of intimidation and racism, now by a remarkably intense and deeply ingrained cultural reticence. Yet, the western world is still a white world. So, if one has a reticence to study, learn and, most importantly, be ā€œwhitenessā€, one effectively cripples oneself when it comes to vast numbers of academic pursuits. Blacks are dealing with a cultural dissonance that causes many of them to hate American culture even as they live, breathe, and think in it. It all starts with language and the culture behind it. It then destroys structured thinking, including science and mathematics.</p>

<p>There are very many other historical pressures bearing down on blacks more than they do on Asians and other groups. I have no time to go into them all. I know history has developed such that in very many black communities, even reading books and listening to certain music can bring a lot of grief to a black kid. Also, the way the black family has been influenced also has a devastating effect on educational performance because too many black kids have no one they love rooting for them. Also, blacks have a significant burden that comes to them in the form of the “stereotype</a> threatā€, which is to say there is an intense psychological pressure upon them to live down to Americaā€™s expectations of blacks in general.</p>

<p>These things hardly affect other groups to the extent they affect blacks. They never have because no other group has had the sort of intense experience of subjugation in this country that blacks have had. When black kids take the SAT, they walk into the test room carrying an invisible load of historical weight that causes many blacks to just give up. When you see a black kid walking casually, and thuggishly into the room to take his test, you are really seeing a black kid who, years ago, just gave up. At the time of the test, he wants to do well, but he knows such a thing is impossible. So, he seeks dignity through acting as if the test doesnā€™t matterā€”and he treats the test as if it doesnā€™t matter.</p>

<p>When I see a black kid being intense about his work, and trying his best on the SAT, I see a kid who has climbed out of a vast pit, inch-by-inch, and against all odds, to do what everyone else does by mere ā€œhard workā€. I think if this kid meets the standard of our schools ā€“ only if he meets the standard, then we should be very sure to turn toward him, open the door, and let him climb in under his own effort. It will not help anyone to throw that kid on the trash heap of statistics.</p>

<p>Many blacks know how to short-circuit the historical pressures and weaknesses I have mentioned. And we are working hard to find ways to get these methods into our communities. But it is going to take a lot of time. Iā€™d love if we could just openly look at what middle-class and upper class whites are doing and just copy a lot of their approaches to familiy and life. There is no harm in learning new stuff from others. A lot of Asian families are doing great things. We should take the best behavioral traits from them when it comes to academics. I would like to perhaps have the government at least support us as we try to take care of these problems at their roots, long before the school system gets involved. But it will take time before blacks gain confidence that they even have a place here in this culture. I donā€™t think we should just shut down all existing efforts in the schools, like Affirmative Action, while we deal with the real causes of the problems. I think we need to keep focus on those blacks who fight to do well, as we develop ways to nail the problems. I think America owes at least that much to blacks. It doesnā€™t have to cost much, and no one has to be ā€œpunishedā€.</p>

<p>Also see the Hawaii state SAT stats... </p>

<p>I'd say the scores were close for everyone but Whites, who scored much higher...probably because they stand out more than non-Asian URMs--they look different. Whites have to 'prove' their worth both socially and academcially seeing as they are readily identifiable and called 'haole', a horrible term, and face oppression by the majority. The good thing for Whites in Hawaii, however, is that mainstream and media culture shows whites more often...so they are at least aware that they are in the larger US majority, and that they do have some power. </p>

<p>One Hawaii kid, Mr. Barak Obama, grew up in the state and was empowered by the experience. Then he went off to college, and things were a bit different. But, he did not lose the sense of himself. For URMs in Hawaii (excluding Whites), it is more welcoming than the Mainland--and does not have as many impediments to getting an education, a good job, and a sense of being able to chart their own course.</p>

<p>It is an interesting twist, especially going from the Mainland to Hawaii, then back again.</p>

<p>The racism and ethnocentric views being expressed here are distasteful. Some of you assume that URMs are never (or rarely) qualified to attend elite universities just because, as a group, they tend to score lower on the SATs than do white/Asian Americans. Do you also assume that their school grades are lower? That their ECs are less ambitious? That their leadership potential, creativity, critical thinking skills, initiative, and intellectual capacity are substandard? That their qualities are less desirable than those of Asians (or whatever)? If so, then you're racist. </p>

<p>You heard directly from an admissions officer. Your assumptions about what constitutes affirmative action are wrong. I teach college freshman, and I have as many Asians at the bottom of my class as I do URMs and whites - and as many URMs at the top as I do Asians and whites. Ethnicites are distributed evenly among the different tiers of ability. If URMs were unqualified, they'd all be sitting at the back of the classroom, gettings Cs and Ds; the reality of it is far from that.</p>

<p>TourGuide...</p>

<p>Being as I have a graduate degree in higher education, have studied higher education for over 10 years, and actually work at a highly selective college and know the faculty here, the students here, and the resources available here (as well as at a whole lot of other schools), I think it's safe to say that I'm pretty informed about who can succeed at these colleges. You guys simply don't get it - the same students are all applying to the "top" schools in this country - the vast majority of whom are academically qualified to do the work!!! Just look here on CC at everyone's application lists - you're all applying to the same schools! Do you really think that 4.0+ GPAs and 2250+ SAT scores are really that rare in the applicant pools at these schools? They simply aren't. And having said stats does not necessarily mean that 1) you'll thrive at a particular school, 2) you'll engage in the community of a particular school, 3) you'll contribute not only to your own learning, but also to that of others at a particular school, or 4) that'll you'll take advantage of the many resources and opportunities available at a particular institution. If you don't demonstrate these qualities to admissions officers, you're not going to get in!!! I can't tell you the number of times I have read an application that was chock full of stats and nothing else...that just doesn't get you in an Ivy or similar some school these days because there are too many kids out there who are equally as strong in this respect, but also in a lot of other ways. Also, it's my job to determine who is "qualified" to be admitted - my life experiences, education, passion for education, professional experience, and open-mindedness to all different types of learners make me qualified to make these decisions - take the time to read my posts or the research I've mentioned in them before you pass judgement on me or any other admissions officers on here or any students you think aren't "qualified". Just because you think you understand what "credentials" are required to excel at a certain school doesn't mean that you actually know what you're talking about. In addition, just for the record, the number one reason why URM students are not retained or graduated at our nation's most "elite" institutions is not because they can't "excel" academically - it's because they do not feel a connection to the campus community. Do you think perhaps the attitude that some people have that they aren't "qualified" to be there contributes to that? Additionally, we do reject URM students and we do have the attitude that they can look at another "outlying" schools as you call them. And, just so you know, there are many schools - like Johns Hopkins, Smith, Rice, Wake Forest, Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, Emory, Northwestern, Bryn Mawr, Colgate, Davidson, Washington and Lee, Barnard, just to name a few - who's admit rates for, for example, black students, are the same as the overall admit rate or actually LOWER than the overall admit rate! See the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education for these stats that institutions have self-reported!
Regarding Thomas Sowell - have you actually read his stuff? One of his major, MAJOR ideas is that what counts in assessing social policy is not its intentions but the actual end results produced...we have seen the achievement gaps between whites and Asian-Americans and URMs close since affirmative action has been instituted. Interestingly, Sowell also posits that Jews in the United States, for example, did not do well on IQ tests pre-World War I; yet after their entry into elite American higher education in large numbers during and after the war (and let's remember that Jews were URMs at this time - they were severely restricted at most elite colleges at the time), their results on these tests rose dramatically - an indication that they had always had the ability to achieve despite the racism and prejudice the faced. Hmmm, I wonder if getting access to higher education at our elite colleges had something to do with this rising achievement...This isn't some "half-baked diversity theory" Tourguide, this is about social justice and education! And speaking of theories, I am afraid that some of your arguments are starting to sound like they are based in eugenics...I hope that's not where they are coming from, but in some ways your arguments do come off this way. </p>

<p>Fabrizio - THE college refers to all the schools on here you all are freaking out about getting into. No one in this forum is talking about "Tier 3 or 4" schools here (although a lot of them are very good!). You guys aren't talking about Southeastern Western Bumbleweed State College or some random school no one outside of your town has heard of - you're all talking about the most prominent institutions in this country and when compared to Bumbleweed State, there is a difference. But most of the students' definitions of "random school" on here are ridiculous. I've read posts where students knock places like Scripps, Lafayette, Trinity, Sewanee, Franklin and Marshall, Crieghton, etc..., yet it's clear that they really don't know anything about these schools. Just because YOU'VE never heard of them or your parents haven't doesn't mean these aren't awesome places with amazing opportunities. So whether you go to Harvard, Brown, Yale, the University of Rochester, Boston University, Knox College, Eckerd, Whitman, Providence College, Berea, or St. Olaf College, you're going to to well for yourself if you take advantage of the opportunities there. But it's not fair to say that simply because an URM student doesn't have a huge SAT score that they don't "qualify" to go to one of the big guns, but it's okay because they'll get into A college somewhere. That was my point - read the post again...
Test prep - not all students know you can buy a prep book for $10 - especially students with terrible guidance counselors or teachers or kids who have parents that never took the SAT - think!
Who does well on the SAT - again, look at some of the research I talked about - like Sternberg's, who's research indicates that while analytical tests (like the SAT) play to the strengths of white- and Asian-American students, other tests which measure creative, experiential, etc..., intelligences play to the strengths of other groups. That's not to say that a student from a particular group can't do well on all kinds of tests, but the SAT is biased because it only measures one type of intelligence and the language they have used in the past does require a certain familiarity with caucasian-American culture - something that many would argue Asian-Americans are more familiar with than African-Americans or Latinos. There are so many educational researchers out there who have the data to back this up....do some reseach before you react and post on here about this stuff!
As far as the methodological flaws of The Shape of the River, kindly tell me what they are...did you read that somewhere, or have you taken advanced statistical analysis at the doctoral level to say this with some kind of authority? Even most critics of The Shape of the River argue that methodologically, this work is air-tight. Just because you've read two critiques of a piece of research doesn't make you an expert Fabrizio. </p>

<p>"If you truly want to create a more equitable society, favoring others by race isnĀ’t the way to do it. There should be more investment at the national level to schools that need it the most. If we can waste billions on a fruitless war in the Middle East, IĀ’m sure we can allocate some money to education, where it would be better used." I certainly agree with you Fabrizio that we need more funding for education. But guess what - it ain't happening. There are plenty of us out there who are trying to lobby for this, but we don't live in a country that has historically viewed education as a public or social good - it has always been viewed as a private good and an investment in an individual's human capital. The federal government's committment to education is deplorable - it favors tax codes the benefit the rich, the private sector, and perpetuating "democracy". And Fabrizio, the playing field is not level for URMs and has NEVER been level as far and education is concerned for these students; affirmative action policies have helped many that would have otherwise continued to be disadvantaged by prejudice and racism. However, I AM GOING TO SAY IT AGAIN - AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS NOT USED TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU ARE MAKING IT OUT TO IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS! Simply because a person is an URM does not make them an admit! It is only one of a myriad of considerations we make about each individual student.</p>

<p>When you guys all become admissions officers or experts in higher education and social policy, let's revisit these arguments. For now...jgsurdna - congratulations to your son! And to the OP, embrace your strengths, don't be modest in your applications, and have faith in the process!</p>

<p>I agree with you Momwaitingfornew...</p>

<p>I counsel low-income HS and CC students during the college admissions process. They are of all ethnicities and have a range of abilities. </p>

<p>We do use the middle-50% statistic, but not in the way some on CC use it to make statements about who is qualified and who is not. It is a little disturbing that some CCer's are advocating a move towards a great stats oriented selective college process--ignoring the social, political, historic, personal, and social considerations that affect an individual applicant.</p>

<p>A holistic review of applications is better able to treat each applicant as a person, rather than representative of the larger group. Context is important--no matter what one talks about.</p>

<p>I hope, some of the attitudes or ideas thrown out on this thread are due to youth and exuberance--rather than reflecting an already entrenched belief in the meaninglessness of social, political, historic, economic, and personal circumstances. Take away context and the attrocities of the past will come back to haunt us.</p>

<p>BTW--I'm also suprised by how vehemently some of the CCer's on this thread attacked AdOfficer, when he was just giving us a different perspective. I guess it is not something they wanted to hear. That's a shame.</p>

<p>AdOfficer,</p>

<p>First off, I applied to no Ivy League schools. I'm not willing to ask my parents to shell out six digits for my undergraduate education, especially since I plan on pursuing graduate study.</p>

<p>I'm surprised that you brought up the issue of fairness, especially since you are an admissions officer. What if that 'under-represented minority' who doesn't have a huge SAT score likes "*A]/i] college"? What if he thinks that it is a good fit for him? What if he thinks that he will enjoy the experience, learn a lot, and graduate with a degree in four years?</p>

<p>Don't people in your occupation frequently stress the importance of fit?</p>

<p>Maybe we should lobby for the ban of test prep materials and tutoring services and see whether or not that does anything to address the test score gap.</p>

<p>Although you disagree on the importance of size in the Shape of the River study, I think it is important. The two groups differ greatly based on undergraduate size. The intended variable change was average SAT scores, but the size also changed. It's not a meaningful comparison when two variables change as you don't know which one causes what.</p>

<p>And, I do not need "advanced statistical analysis at the doctoral level" to know that changing two variables and then making bold statements about the results is flawed.</p>

<p>As far as the "extent" to which I make it out, Drs. Bowen and Bok themselves state that if group preferences were removed, then the percentage of Blacks at elite universities would drop significantly. It's on pages 50 and 51, if I remember correctly.</p>

<p>All this talk has made me curious on how I can start a civil rights initiative later on in life...</p>

<p>I read posts here from parents whose child attends private school, has the free time and money for extracurriculars, paid thousands of dollars for test prep for PSAT and SAT and done who knows what else. How can anyone think that you can compare test scores between that child and the child of poverty, coming out of a bad school district? The stellar student coming out of Science High in Newark, NJ may not have the scores of the child coming from The Lawrenceville School, but they both will have a drive to do well, and a love of learning.<br>
If the college admissions staff are doing their job they are not looking just at how they did - they are looking at the child's potential to learn at their college. Plenty of kids of all backgrounds have fine potential to soar at college, given that chance.
In addition, how the heck can a college turn out world leaders if all they enroll are white folks with identical backgrounds?<br>
I love the old joke about a 1/2 glass of water. The optimist sees it as half full, the pessimist sees it as half empty and the x-person says "who stole my water?"
Letting URM have an equal shot at Yale does not mean the kid stole your child's water!
x=self serving person of your choice.</p>