I agree. Less inequality and more diversity is a good thing. The focus should be on education more than prestige.
2 Likes
For my alma mater (a T25) Asians are included in the POC calculation that Tufts mentioned. Only about 27% of that school was white last time I checked. I does NOT mean that there is a ton of diversity. Most students are not URM.
Tufts may be different, but I would be surprised if their POC stat was all URMs.
4 Likes
Interesting.
1 Like
To my point above, does Tufts define in the letter who is included in the POC stat?
Whoa. No, it does not.
These types of marketing diversity stats can be highly misleading. Some possible issues are below. Some of these have been noted by other posters:
- Applicants vs accepted vs matriculated?
- Are ORM Asian students counted as “of color”?
- Are students of multiple races double counted , so total is >100%?
Using federal definitions as would appear in CDS, IPEDS, or similar federal reporting often looks less impressive. Some examples are below from the most recent IPEDS. Using federal reporting, Tufts appears to be among the least diverse highly selective colleges.
Percent URM (Black + Hispanic + Native American): IPEDS 2020-21
Pomona – 29% (18% Hispanic, 11% Black), (30% White, 18% Asian), (11% International)
Amherst – 25%
Harvey Mudd – 24%
UCLA – 23%
CMC – 22%
Emory – 21%
NYU – 20%
USC – 20%
Williams – 20%
Berkeley – 18%
Rice – 18%
Vanderbilt – 18%
Yale – 18%
Barnard – 17%
Brown – 17%
Cornell – 17%
JHU – 17%
Stanford – 17%
Tulane – 17%
_ _ _ Gap _ _ _
Tufts – 13% (8% Hispanic, 5% Black), (51% White, 14% Asian), (13% International)
Caltech – 12% (11% Hispanic, 1% Black), (29% White, 23% Asian), (30% International)
5 Likes
Thanks for the education. I didn’t realize I was falling for the spin.
These numbers probably include graduate students. The actual numbers disclosed by Caltech (including students who self-identify as multiracial) can be found here:
For example, the percentage of international undergraduate students is about 8% (not 30%), Hispanic and Black students are 22% and 6%, respectively.
1 Like
Why do they not break down international students? That’s also misleading.
You mean by country?
Yes. They break down domestic students by white, Asian, Hispanic, black…
Not sure about Caltech. But for schools that disclose international students’ countries of origin, majority of these students are from two countries: China and India (the two countries with by far the largest populations).
Good catch. I clicked the wrong pulldown. The totals for undergrads are as follows. It’s the same conclusion with Tufts being among the least diverse highly selective college, but different specific numbers.
Caltech numbers are mostly similar to your link. The main difference is White. I expect Caltech is double counting certain groups such as Hispanic as White, so total of all races is well above 100%. Federal reporting requires separating groups with no double counting, so “White” means non-Hispanic White. While Caltech is not known for playing reporting games, I expect they realize it looks more favorable to minimize the degree to which Asian students outnumber non-Hispanic White students.
Percent URM (Black + Hispanic + Native American): IPEDS 2020-21
Pomona – 29% (18% Hispanic, 11% Black), (30% White, 18% Asian), (11% International)
Amherst – 25%
Stanford – 25%
UCLA – 25%
Harvey Mudd – 24%
NYU – 24%
JHU – 24%
Rice – 24%
Yale – 24%
MIT – 23%
CMC – 22%
Columbia – 22%
Cornell – 22%
_ _ _ Gap _ _ _
Caltech – 20% (18% Hispanic, 2% Black), (23% White, 40% Asian), (8% International)
_ _ _ Gap _ _ _
Colby – 13%
CMU – 13%
Northeastern – 13%
Tufts – 12% (8% Hispanic, 4% Black), (51% White, 15% Asian), (11% International)
Michigan – 11%
2 Likes
I remember doing the analysis on what S19’s chances were for Williams RD. Once you take out the EDs and account for legacies and URMs and then divide that number in half for the male portion of the acceptances, the chances that a white, suburban kid from Chicago with no hooks would be accepted was almost zero. I tried to account for a little overlap for ED and legacy/URM. That just makes the chances even lower.
257 accepted in ED for class of 500. That left 243 spots.
50% of students at Williams are students of color.
4500 men applied that year. Let’s assume half of the 500 EDs were male. That leaves 4250 males applying in RD for 325 males accepted in RD. Already that is an acceptance rate of 7%. Assume half are URM so down to 3.5%. Assume some are legacies who didn’t apply ED and some are the chosen ones from the private high schools who also get kids into a school like Williams and that lowers it even more. Only a few kids apply to Williams from our high school each year and, as far as I can tell over the last ten years, none have been admitted. I’m not sure why S19 bothered.
4 Likes
I think Amherst is WAY more than 25% URM. Closer to 50%. Williams CDS shows 50%. Last I looked at Amherst’s in 2019, it was close to the same. I’m too lazy to look it up now. Lol.
You should look it up rather than taking the word of marketing or memory. The totals for all undergrads in the CDS match IPEDS since both use the same federal reporting format.
Amherst 2020 CDS – 119/434 = 27% first year, 436/1745 = 25% all undergrads
Williams 2020 CDS – 67/482 = 14% first year, 382/2917 = 20% all undergrads
4 Likes
I’m not sure where you’re getting that. I’m looking at Williams CDS.
Non resident aliens 186 (includes international students)
Hispanic 271
Black 141
Asian 254
American Indian 3
that’s 855
White non-Hispanic 1024
45.5% non-White
Your earlier post said “WAY more than 25% URM.” Asian students are not URMs at Amherst or Williams. Instead they are ORMs. My earlier post specified that I was only counting Black, Hispanic, and Native American as URMs.
3 Likes
Right - I think this is another example of confusion between URMs and POC that was discussed earlier.
I doubt any NESCAC is remotely close to 50% URM.
3 Likes
Ah ok. I meant non-white. Our S19 is white, not Asian, so I was only trying to figure out his chances.