Li sues Princeton: response to citygirlsmom, and selective others

Applying to College
1

<p>Even though I disagree with the actual philosophy, I believe colleges have a legitimate reason for their Affirmative Action programs.</p>

<p>However, before you bash Mr. Li for his lack of character (which i really don't see how you can know that based on his filing a suit against a respected instituition), please pretend that it was an African American, or a Hispanic American who had 2400 on his/her SATs and top 1% rank. can you see this "character-less and arrogant" person getting rejected by HPSM? would you still vehemently attack and label this person as arrogant and character-less if he/she indeed filed a lawsuit after getting rejected? Mr. Li was probably right when he said that he would probably be accepted if he was black or hispanic. </p>

<p>the posts by citygirlsmom and others carry the typical white attitude to Dr. Martin Luther King and his civil rights movement in the 60s. these posters use the same rhetoric, largely ignoring implausibilities in their own logic, and resort to ethnocentricism and racial stereotyping</p>

<p>it's just as dangerous to assume that all asians are smart and bookish as blacks are poor and ghetto, or hispanics are illegal immigrants</p>

2

<p>Personally, I agree with Mr. Li. I think that the affirmative action programs have been taken way too far. </p>

<p>On the common data sets colleges say that things like race and socioeconomic level are simply <em>considered</em></p>

<p>Why, then, are asians with 2400 SATs rejected while african americans and hispanics are extremely competitive with anything above 2000? It seems like these things are much more than considered, it seems like they're almost deciding factors.</p>

3

<p>"However, before you bash Mr. Li for his lack of character (which i really don't see how you can know that based on his filing a suit against a respected institution), please pretend that it was an African American, or a Hispanic American who had 2400 on his/her SATs and top 1% rank. can you see this "character-less and arrogant" person getting rejected by HPSM? would you still vehemently attack and label this person as arrogant and character-less if he/she indeed filed a lawsuit after getting rejected? "</p>

<p>If the person were Hispanic from a Spanish speaking household or African American with a 2400, they probably would be one of the only students of their background with that score. That unusualness would definitely boost their chances.</p>

<p>If such a student was rejected by places like Princeton, frankly, I'd assume that the student had done something egregious in their application or during their interview. </p>

<p>If the student decided to sue about not being admitted, I'd think that the student was very arrogant. No one is entitled to get into the top colleges. To sue over not being admitted seems at best naive, at worst, arrogant.</p>

4

<p>
[quote]
it's just as dangerous to assume that all asians are smart and bookish as blacks are poor and ghetto, or hispanics are illegal immigrants

[/quote]
</p>

<p>is it dangerous to assume that all whites subscribe to "the typical white attitude"?</p>

<p>delete your nonsense post now</p>

5

<p>People with the highest scores are not automatically admitted to a school. if it were so, why would schools ask for personal statements, recommendation letters, and why would admissions offices call high schools for more "personalized" information about the applicant.</p>

<p>suing a school for not being admitted is indeed arrogant, as northstarmom said.</p>

6

<p>Simply arrogant , a school could accept whoever they want really. It does not matter that you have a perfect SAT score , that is not the only thing they are looking for. They aren't lookin for the perfect score but the perfect person for thier school.</p>

7

<p>I agree with Northstarmom. Application materials can be divided into two categories - tangible (scores, GPA, rank, courses taken) and intangible (recommendations, essays, interviews). Just because someone's tangibles are top-notch doesn't mean their intangibles are equally top-notch. </p>

<p>Personally, I think Mr. Li will be wasting a lot of money paying lawyers.</p>

8

<p>quote: "Why, then, are asians with 2400 SATs rejected while african americans and hispanics are extremely competitive with anything above 2000?"</p>

<p>And why, then are kids of the wealthy, politically connected, Hollywood connected, etc... extemely competitive with 2000 or less?</p>

<p>It's just the way of the world. So is it ok to admit the privilideged for less than steller stats, but not ok to admit other applicants for other non-academic reasons?</p>

<p>Just another question to think about.... and personally, I'd be more upset that nearly 1/2 of an incoming class was admitted due to influence than to the affirmative action guildlines.</p>

9

<p>do not DARE say that I am rascist...that is so far off the mark it is unbelievable</p>

<p>I say he is arrogant becuase his attitude is that with his stellar #s he should have been accepted everywhere</p>

<p>All Princeton has to do is trot out their #s showing many other students who were rejected with the same #s</p>

<p>As well, maybe his essays were bad, maybe his recs were bad</p>

<p>Where did I talk about RACE...no where in any of my posts did I discuss race and I take exception to your assertions. Please read any of my posts, and you will see I am not a bigot and to say I am disgusts me.</p>

<p>If you bothered to read my posts, my MAIN point is that to expect schools to admit JUST based on scores alone does a disservice to everyone and will damage the school. </p>

<p>I think being a purely # driven process is not good, and we have that to a large degree here in California. GPA is everything, and that is unfair to many many students. We can see that at UCLA right now, with African American admissions DOWN because of a # driven approach</p>

<p>So, if you are going to use my name, pleawse actually read what I wrote.</p>

<p>If you want to get rid of discrimination, you need to look at the WHOLE perosn, not just and some scores that you can cram for. As for GPA, well, varies from school to school and some HS's pad GPAs to get kids into Ivys, and you know what, Ivy's know it.</p>

<p>So do not EVER say I am racists, to do so is to be intellectually lazy and not really reading what i have written. Disgusting</p>

10

<p>A stupid and arrogant kid sued Princeton and now we have war of the worlds here. BTW, I am also an Asian and think his claims are pretty stupid. These Li threads are pretty funny.</p>

11

<p>I don't understand why being number-driven is not good. How is it unfair to many students? College is a place where you learn, so top instititions SHOULD prefer students that try hard and do well in school, NOT students who do well outside of school.</p>

12

<p>I think that colleges don't want students who sit 24 hours a day studying, and everything doesn't come down to the scores. And the admission decisions also depends on the essays , the ECs and the recos.</p>

13

<p>^^^^ Yuppppppppp</p>

14

<h1>driven can draw students who ONLY study and who only do cursery ECs, and schools want a PERSON, not a set of stats</h1>

<p>Most schools would rather a kids who does well in school but who ALSO does service work, has a job, sings, does cartooning, yearbook, sports or other things</p>

<p>It is easy to just sit and study, but does is that person nore than just there grades?</p>

<p>Sure some have it all, but I would bet you these schools want more than cookie cutter kids</p>

15

<p>"I don't understand why being number-driven is not good. How is it unfair to many students? College is a place where you learn, so top instititions SHOULD prefer students that try hard and do well in school, NOT students who do well outside of school."</p>

<p>Colleges want students that will contribute to the school -- not only academically but through volunteering, leading clubs, and just helping out their fellow classmate. It is shown that the more diverse a group is, the greater number of unique approaches will be formulated. When you put all these together, you create a situation where students can interact with many other 'types' (personality-wise) and have a great time. If you were to go to college and found that 70% of the population had the same personality (I am not suggesting that all Asians, nor that all high-scoring Asians, have the same personality -- I will contend,however, that people who have the same characteristics and interests will have fairly similar personalities), it would get dull pretty soon I'm sure.</p>

<p>Colleges want students who are not focused on themselves, but know the rewards of helping others and working together (once again, the disclaimer given above applies here too), this will not only create a better campus atmosphere, but students who are struggling will be more likely to find help from their peers.</p>

<p>Now, how is the college going to measure this selfless trait? Through test scores? No. Through GPA? No. Through top awards in individualistic sports or contests? NO. They will look at the various EC's that the person participated in and the different essays that the applicant wrote and will use this information to judge how much of this trait is in that person. Whether they are correct or not, it is their choice to make and it is the applicants responsibility to best represent himself on the application.. if there is miscommunication, the applicant can only be held responsible.</p>

<p>As mentioned earlier, the college wants diversity. Looking at Lin's EC list, he is majorly science/mathy (he did have a great award for FBLA, though, which is great but it is not consistent with anything else he did as for communicating his versatility). It is apparent that there is a large subgroup of the Asian community that also is very interested in science and math, along with having the ability to do well on standardized tests, while being (give or take an activity/award or two) fairly single-minded. The colleges are now put in a dilemma, they advocate great test scores and a good GPA, but they must look at the overall picture -- how will their diverse campus life survive if there are a huge number of people with the same interests? They then use their past experience on how certain people thrive at their school, combined with the information presented in the applicant's application to judge how well the person fits in the large scheme. </p>

<p>No one can deny that Jian Li is a great candidate for a top school, and has amazing credentials. He will most likely succeed wherever he would end up going. However, the schools in question obviously found gaps in this young man's application, whether it be in the essays, the extracurriculars, the lack or sports (who knows?) and they made a decision that this applicant did not have the versatility to add to their school. </p>

<p>Colleges want great students. They want students who will eventually contribute back to the university, whether through finances or renownedness. They don't just deny people because of their race -- they look at the entire picture, "How will this applicant fair in this school? How have other applicants like this thrived and contributed to the school?" To contend that the colleges are throwing away better candidates because of race is ludicrous. The colleges want to thrive, they want the best of the best. Jian li just did not stand up to his competitors, whether they be black, white, asian, hispanic, whatever. A rejection from 3 or 4 of the top universities (while accepted by 1) doesn't suggest that all of these institutions are flawed, it suggests that the applicant was borderline, and was a best fit at Yale. Many apply to multiple top schools and are accepted by only 1, does this mean that at the other schools the admissions council rejected them because of race? That's just absurd. </p>

<p>Jian Li needs to understand that his grades aren't everything, there is more to an American University application than numbers (or else why would there be so much room to include ECs, essays, recommendation letters, etc.?). He did not meet the standards at all of the top schools to be accepted and he needs to deal with this rather than blame it on the school. If he continues to blame the institution without correct investigation (he said he filed this because of an article he read about Asian students' SAT scores -- did he do any analysis of the article? Look for other studies and see if there was true causation there?) he will never understand that sometimes in life we don't accomplish our goals, but instead of dwelling on these 'failures' we must move on and continue to work towards our next goal. He seems like a very bright young man, and I can only hope that he realizes this. He will accomplish so much more if he stops glancing back at what could have been and focuses his gaze on the future.</p>

<p>Sorry for the so many words, but when posters have to stoop so low as to call out respected members of this community (citygirlsmom) with baseless accusations, there's a lot I have to say.</p>

16

<p>The fact that Li even felt indignant at his rejection just proves that he IS # driven. </p>

<p>And AznPwyd, being #driven is not a bad thing. It will motivate you to try harder in school. But being SOLEY-#driven is a problem. What grows from it are students who don't care about anything and anyone in the world but their scores, and students who rely on Cheating (on the SATs, on APs, GPA etc.) and money bribing.</p>

17

<p>I don't get it? Why is there an argument between GPA and extracurricular factors? Li is suing because of racial discrimination, not because he believes students with perfect score is entitle to admissions. Yes, grades and scores aren't everything; character, passion, accomplishments, and everything beyond the classroom count too. However, was he rejected because of those things beyond academic, or was he rejected because of his race? I don't know, but that is not the important thing. What important is whether discrimination still prevails in society. </p>

<p>We got to step back and think for a second here. What is Li's goal? If it is to grant admissions to all perfect scorers, then no he doesn't have a legitmate case. If he is fighting for the automatic admissions of overachievers everywhere, then I'll boo him back to Jersey. But that is not the case. Is he fighting for an admission slot into Harvard or Princeton? No. What he is fighting for is the end of discrimination in college admissions. Should there be special treatment for or discrimination against you and me because we were borned in a certain bracket of income, a certain racial makeup, a certain last name? Any judgment bases on factors that are beyond our control is discrimination.</p>

<p>Who's here can claim that there is no such thing as discrimination in college admissions? We all know that there is: legacy and race being the two most prominent. Almost everyone here seems to ignore elephant in the room: Asian gets discriminate against. But everyone can brush it away because if that Asian can't get into Princeton, he could get into Yale or Stanford, no big lost. However, that still ignored the obvious that there was an act of discrimination. Li was the first to point out the elephant, but he gets attack because everyone believe that if they ignore it, then it would go away.</p>

<p>If in 2008 there was a ballot initiative in every states of the Union to ban racial discrimination (similar to Michigan's and California's) How many states do you think will pass the proposition? I believe a majority of them will. Why? Because most Americans want to end discrimination.</p>

18

<p>
[quote]
What he is fighting for is the end of discrimination in college admissions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>He has no evidence, he created the case after reading an article about Asian SATs compared to other races' SATs. I doubt he did a great amount of research or analysis of his sources before doing this. </p>

<p>He is not fighting for anything but attention. If he was, he'd be much more informed on the reality of the seemingly sporadic way college admissions works.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Asian gets discriminate against.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Everyone is throwing around these accusations at top colleges, but no one is offering proof. How can you expect me to believe this when you offer me no empirical proof? </p>

<p>Prove to me that Asians are getting discriminated against on the basis of their race at the top universities discussed here.</p>

19

<p>"He is not fighting for anything but attention. If he was, he'd be much more prepared."
Can you prove to me that this is the case? Aren't you guilty of your own accusion, wanting emperical evidence before making claim, but does not provide it in your own statement?</p>

<p>"Prove to me that Asians are getting discriminated against on the basis of their race."
Do we need to point out the obvious? But if you insist. The most obvious example is the passage of proposition 209 in 1996 in California. Asian admission into UCs jumps into the top 30s to the low 40s percentile after hovering in the teens to twenties in the previous years. The percentage remains stable throughout the 10 years since the proposition passes. Was the Asian pollution suddenly got all that smarter in just one year from 95 to 96? A study done by Princeton concludes that if race wasn't a factor, Asian's admission would jump disproportionately to the other races. </p>

<p>Now, if WindSlicer is content that there is no such thing as racial discrimination against Asian, there why is there a fear of what Li is doing? If there wasn't a bias against Asian students, then his demand to change the current admission procedure to be racially neutral would produce no changes in the Asian percentage in the student popuation. However, this is not the case as history and studies have told us.</p>

20

<p>I'll admit, that statement was deduced from comments made about the original WSJ article. Due to my inability to access this article and my personal apprehension towards that statement anyhow, I'll retract it (All along I've been trying to avoid judging his character, didn't quite follow through here).</p>

<p>I would also like to apologize for editting my post while you were posting. Your quote of me saying, "Prove to me that Asians are getting discriminated against on the basis of their race." changed to "Prove to me that Asians are getting discriminated against on the basis of their race at the top universities discussed here."</p>

<p>I believe there's a valid distinction between the UC system (largely regarded as numbers-based, at least that's what I've picked up from CC) and that of the top Ivy-league and top10 schools. I truly believe that the superficial racial-discrimination of Asian Americans at the top schools is not racial discrimination, but a consideration of diversity as a large subgroup of the Asian American race is focused on the science/math and are therefore distinguished in these areas (disclaimer: I understand all asians are not interested in science/math). The predominance of these people (asian or not) with the same interests causes colleges to accept only the top of the top of the top of this group and to look at more diverse applicants (another poster noted that this is also a case with caucasian BWRKs, Bright, Well-Rounded Kids).</p>

<p>I don't have proof for this statement because I have no access to the information from the top/Ivy league universities, which is why I was hoping/still am hoping to get some information concerning the discrimination there. I am fairly open-minded and take information as it is. I did not mean the proposal to provide more information to be taken as an antagonistic challenge, but just so I could see any info you might have.</p>