Minorities?

jamimom · October 20, 2004, 9:11pm

I don't know how you know anyone is denied because of his race. Who said he was denied because he was Asian? It is an opinion only. I have seen non Asian kids with stellar resumes and top academics also denied. Harvard says less than a third of the admitted students are pure academic admits. And those who are admitted in that manner are the cream of the crop academically. We can pick students anecdotally ad nauseum as examples, something you have said yourself does not prove a thing. The fact of the matter is that the needs and wants of a college at a given time dictate how the holistic evaluation turns out. And that information is not available from the colleges. I don't know of any college that groups the Asian students in the applicant pool and have them compete against each other. I don't even know of a college who spends the time trying to figure out who is Asian. If there is a whispering campaign among the elite colleges to pick out the Asians and keep them in a quota system, it is strange that this has not come out. Colleges have been very up front about the URM pool, and in the Michigan Supreme Court case, among others, the system used has been laid out, warts and all. With the revolving door of adcoms even in elite colleges, this would surely have come to court. With such definitive statements, why hasn't this come to court? I do not believe that the evidence is there.

I can tell you that my stats and those of the College Books of several elite prep schools have not shown any glaring inconsistency between non URM students without hooks at given academic profiles. That there are more Asian students at the higher end of the stats, is quite right, but those non Asian students at that spectrum without hooks fare the same as the Asian students. I know several non Asian student who were tops in the math/ science olympiads and other national contests who did not get into their first choice school. One young man I know who did not get into ANY ivy league school, not only had near perfect stats, but was a national forensic champion and was well supported by his school. Two Asian kids without such a hook did get in from his class with lower academic stats. Who the heck could figure these things out? In the 10 years that I have worked with kids on college boards and applications, about half the kids are Asian. I can come with anecdote after anecdote about Asian kids who were accepted at HPYwithout the accolades that the kids you talk about have. Many are competing against each other,not because they are Asian but because their apps look so danged similar that their own parents can't pick them out, a game I like to play as a demonstration. I can throw in a few non Asian apps as well and those kids will fare the same as their Asian counterpart. It's only when you throw in the apps of "hooked" candidates that the numbers sharply change in acceptance/rejection rates.

rattle1 · October 20, 2004, 9:27pm

Mini said,

"You continue to talk about Asian Americans as if, as a group, they exist."

You have made my point. The adcoms do exactly this by lumping Asian Americans into one group with one classification as Asian Americans on the application. This is also done for Blacks, Latinos, etc.. That's the absurdity of using race and ethnic group classifications. In fact the Cambodians or Hmong are considered Asian Americans. They are not given racial preferences based on their Asian race for admissions, but they may be given preferences based on economic disadvantage and "first in family to attend college" which is quite different from getting a racial preference, which Asian Americans DO NOT GET BASED ON RACE. That's the point. Blacks get a racial preference based on the color of the skin, irrespective of their economic status. In fact, the vast majority of blacks admitted to Harvard are affluent blacks from the middle and upper middle classes who underperform and are admitted with lowered standards simply because they are Black, not because they were economically disadvantaged. Harvard's admitted blacks, by en large, ARE NOT ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED. Less than 10% of them even qualify for the Pell Grants, given to economically disadvantaged students of any race.

I am for giving preferential treatment to students based on economic disadvantage of ANY race, including the ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED Hmongs and ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED Blacks based on an economic disadvantage preference on admissions, but not based on a racial preference. That's that the point.

Economic disadvantage TRANSCENDS RACE. Using the racial preference for blacks at Harvard and the Iviies does not benefit economically disadvantaged blacks by en large. The black racial preference benefits the affluent underachieving blacks. They should not receive preference over a higher performing poorer Asian American or Hmong.

That's the absurdity of using race as a factor or perference. Abolish race preferences and use everything else these schools deem necessary for admissions. Use economic disadvantage or "first in family to attend college" as preferences for admissions, but don't use race or ethnic group. The aforemention TRANSCENDS RACE.

rattle1 · October 20, 2004, 9:46pm

Jamimom said,

"I can tell you that my stats and those of the College Books of several elite prep schools have not shown any glaring inconsistency between non URM students without hooks at given academic profiles. That there are more Asian students at the higher end of the stats, is quite right, but those non Asian students at that spectrum without hooks fare the same as the Asian students."

Please let me access these these stats to support your claims. Which "College Books" are you referring to. Colleges and universities don't release these "stats", simply because they are damning and reveal how unfair the race based admissions policy is.
Please give me references for your "stats". Thank you.

Here are some stats which will give relative acceptance rates at Brown and Penn from their respective newspapers. The Ivies will never reveal racial stats because they are damning.

From the 2/22/01 and 4/3/01 Brown Daily Herald:

Brown University Class of '05

16,500 applicants

Asian Americans: 20.3% of the applicants, 16% of the acceptances
African Americans: 6% of the applicants, 9% of the acceptances
Latino Americans: 7.1% of the applicants, 9% of the acceptances
Whites and others: 66.6% of the applicants, 66% of the acceptances

From the 2/12/01 The Daily Pennsylvanian (<a href="http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com%5B/url%5D):">www.dailypennsylvanian.com):</a>

Asian American applicants represent 31% of the 19,086 applicants for the University of Pennsylvanias Class of 2005 but only about 23% of the acceptances. UPenn accepts Asian Americans at a lower rate than any other group.

rattle1 · October 20, 2004, 10:09pm

Pebbles said, "Despite of race, applicants still need to be treated as individuals. I hate to be clumped in with all the "asians with good math/science scores" because that's NOT all I am about. I'm a very well-rounded person and have a LOT of commitment in everything I do... when it comes to college admission, COMMITMENT to the things you do should be valued WAY above the actual activities and how they relate to your RACE."

Well said, Pebbles! You just highlighted the stereotypes used against Asian American applicants. Well said.

Mystic221 · October 21, 2004, 12:12am

This thread has more pages then the forum lol

VTBoy · October 21, 2004, 12:43am

Jamimon THE FACT IS AA IS ABOUT couting race in admissing that directly means someone will be REJECTED because of their RACE. THE FACT is that studies have shown that Asian that where more qualified than blacks in EVERY category including EC where less likly to be accepted into the same schools. The FACT is that when Uni of Cal droped AA the number of Asian American admission skyrocketed, and the FACT is it was determined that AA caused a great negative affect on Asian admission , simply because of their race. You talk about a wholistic view to admission but why not just have a wholistic view without including RACE. Why should a rich black kid get any extra benfit when it comes to admission over a poor and highly improverish vietnamese student, because that is exactly what you are advocating. There is nothing that you can say that will justify that.

You talk about stats, I have stats to show that URM on average have lower GPAs than non URMS in college, and that URM accepted into profession schools take longer to pass their board exams.

rattle1 · October 21, 2004, 9:42am

Jamimom said,

"I don't know how you know anyone is denied because of his race."

Jamimom, this really has become a game of semantics with the use of synomyms and code words for QUOTA, which all have the same meaning. I do know that Asian Am are sujected de facto quotas, because the use of RACE in this zero-sum game of admissions for RACIAL "diversity" alone MEANS that there are DE FACTO RACIAL QUOTAS. These are not numerical quotas, but RACIAL "diversity" means certain underprepared groups such as blacks are admitted based solely on race/diversity (as evidenced by the vast majority of Harvard's blacks coming from the upper-middle and upper economic classes). Harvard's AFFLUENT admitted blacks are admitted under lowered standards, which include SAT I scores on average as much as several hundred points lower than the Harvard SAT I average of 1500 with GPAs and all other criteria lower. There are only 70 blacks in the country with SAT scores of 1500 and above. There are several thousand spaces in the elite colleges for this group of high scoring blacks alloted in this DE FACTO RACIAL QUOTA/racial "diversity" scenario. Therefore, of the miniscule number of the 70, maybe less than half will attend Harvard, meeting Harvard's SAT I standard. That gives 35 high scoring blacks left to the schools that require high scores such as MIT, CalTech, the 7 remaining Ivies, Stanford, Duke, and Rice, which have 8% to 10% racial diversity/de facto racial quotas for blacks resulting in an Black-White (Asian) Test Score Gap as much 200 to 300 points on the average in the Ivies, Stanford,MIT, etc.. There is a SAT I Score Gap as much 500 points for blacks between the SAT I average for the rest of the admitted class in schools such UC Berkeley before the the end of race-based AA. This resulted in a less than 40% graduation rate for blacks. This test score gap was 2 1/2 standard deviations from the mean SAT I scores of UC Berkeley, QUITE SIGNIFICANT. No matter how one demonizes the SAT I, this test score gap for blacks resulted in admitting underprepared and underachieving black students to Berkeley, the majority of them failed miserably or if they graduated, they graduated at the BOTTOM of the class, simply because of the double standards used in admissions. Now, one may say, don't use the the SAT I, but use the SAT II (achievement tests) for admissions. You will get the same results with the SAT II, if a double standard is used. Now, many schools will place more value on the SAT II scores, a measure of achievement. Remember, a student of any race needs a MINIMUM level of achievement to do college work. If they do not achieve that level, they should not be in college, let alone the elite colleges, the pinnacle being Harvard, MIT, CalTech (it claims no racial preferences are given with lowered standards for blacks), Stanford, Princeton and Yale. There are only a miniscule number of blacks who qualified in the SAT I (and the SAT IIs) in the nation, 70 in all in 2003 according to the College Board for these schools which allot thousands of spaces with these diversity/goals/diversty quotas for blacks. Harvard has the lowest Black-White Test Score Gap, with its 200 acceptances of blacks, simply because it almost depleted the miniscule pool of blacks of 70 who scored 1500+. Even at Harvard, the gap can be as much 200 points on average and as much as 500 points at with acceptances of 1000 or less on the SAT I. There are very few blacks left for the rest of the elite colleges such as YPSMC, and almost no high scoring blacks left for elite public universities such as UC Berkeley, UCLA, and the U.of Virginia, resulting in score gaps as much as 500 points between black SAT I scores and the scores of the rest of the class. This was the case at Berkeley and UCLA. This admissions process is a zero-sum game, meaning that a racial inclusionary quota for blacks, or a inclusionary for latinos, results in exclusionary quota for Asians or for for whites. It is zero-sum game. The outcome is all relative for the groups involved.

Blacks are admitted under a DOULBLE standard, a standard lower than for any other group.And the travesty of this is the these blacks are the affluent blacks who underform and underachieve.

Now, you may say that these blacks have more ECs or superior "holistic" criteria, based on a SUBJECTIVE EVAULATION of the adcom, subject to biases towing the politically correct line towards URMs for acceptance, including essays, than the Asians or the Whites, as Northstarmom suggested. There is absolutely no evidence for this. Quite the opposite, if one looked at the applicant files OBJECTIVELY, as they did at Brown and Stanford. Asian American not only had outstanding academic records, in addition to outstandandin ECs, winning awards in nation competitions and international competion in math, science, the perforforming and literary arts as well as outstanding records of involvement in community service, destroying the racist stereotype of the Asian Am as a "premed majoring in biochem playing the violin". Unfortunately and sadly, many on this board still subscribe to this stereotype by lumping Asian Americans into one sinlge group with the use of diversity/de facto racial quota. This is exactly what the adcoms do. Again, the adcoms should look at each applicant as individuals, without considering race and ethnicity, even if the applicant's race is known. Individuality TRANSCENDS race. Diversity TRANSCENDS race.

rattle1 · October 24, 2004, 12:46am

To Jamimom, here's how I know Asian Americans are denied because of their race:

From 2/26/01 The New York Times: "Public Lives: Family History Forges Labor Secretary's Convictions "

["I know what discrimination is," says Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao. Then Ms. Chao was recruited to serve on an alumni board for Harvard. That experience, Ms. Chao said, showed her how Harvard's racial goals for admission meant that Asian-Americans were held back. Even though Asian-Americans had the highest test scores and highest grade-point averages, she said, they had the lowest admission rate because the school did not want to go over its goals for Asian-Americans. (In December 2000, when Harvard admitted 1,105 new students on an early basis for the new freshman class, 18.4 percent were Asian-American, 7.2 percent were Hispanic, 6.1 percent were African-American and 0.8 percent were Native Americans, according to the school's admissions office.) "The goal concept means you'll be subject to a higher standard of achievement for admission," said Ms. Chao, defining the particular glass ceiling and racial discrimination her community has faced since Asians first came to this country.]

ethioman00 · October 24, 2004, 3:59am

Yes VTBoy, all of your stats may be true. Still, blacks have a right to be represented at highly competitive colleges. The fact of the matter is - race really does matter. As much as you'd like to act as if we live in a "colorblind" society, it simply is not the case. Until I can walk down a sidewalk without seeing whites move to the other side, or quit getting pulled over for absolutely no reason by the police, or get followed around in my local clothing stores, I'm going to believe this. And if hurts your application, thats too goddamn bad.

davidrune · October 24, 2004, 4:16am

ethioman, why does more equal rights always have to mean more rights for black people. Asians suffer from prejudice as well. In fact so do homosexuals, jewish people, and any other visible minority.

davidrune · October 24, 2004, 4:19am

Getting pulled over for being black, getting followed aroudn in local clothing stores or even having white people run away from you... is in no way related to education in any way whatsoever.

If this is the problem that you face, then the government should invest money in education white people in your area. Which I'm sorry, but sounds very racist. This doesn't mean that you should get a free trip to university.

rattle1 · October 24, 2004, 9:48am

ethioman said,

Yes all of VT's stats are true.

This is the kind of attitude of "entitilement" from blacks, whites, and others who favor racial preferences that will unravel a democratic society. In the past, the WASPs (White Anglo-Protestants) had exactly the same attitude of "entitlement. This was wrong for the WASPs then, and it is wrong for the blacks today. Racial preferences never worked in history. It didn't work in Nazi Germany or today's Bosnia.

You don't penalize one of the smallest minority groups in America, the Asian Ams, in elite college admissions, because racism exists in our society. Racism exists against all minorities, including Asian Ams. Asian Ams, as a demographic group have never asked for racial preferences, received racial preferences or need racial preferences used as a PLUS (+) in elite college admissions. The facts of this issue indicate that Asian Ams, as an applicant group, receive a big NEGATIVE (-) in race basced Affirmative Action, favoring blacks and URMs (underrrprepresented minorities), simply because Asian Ams are considered OVERRREPRESENTED, by virtue of them being the MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED APPLICANT GROUP, as a result of their hard work, perseverance, ECs, special talents, leadership, intellect, creativity, and overcoming of obstabcles of poverty, language, cultural and racial diifferences, as well as having the highest SAT I scores and GPAs among the applicant groups, yet they are admitted at the LOWEST RATES among all the applicant groups. They should be accepted at the highest rates among all the applicant groups, whites, blacks, latinos, and Asian Ams, because as an applicant group, they meet and exceed all the standards and holistic criteria for admissions, yet Asian Ams are admitted at the LOWEST RATES. Why???

Blacks and URMs receive a HUGE PLUS (+) in admissions and whites receive neither a PLUS (+) or a NEGATIVE (-).

Asian Ams recive a NEGATIVE (-) in elie college admissions

Asian Ams paid the heaviest price. whites did not pay a price, and blacks received the biggest gain with the use of this demented, unfair and immoral policy of racial preferential treatment in AA with admissions. The proof of my statement lies in the fact that, where ever and whenever race based AA is abolished, as in the U.of Texas-Austin, U.of California Berkeley and UCLA, U.of Washington, and even in the private schools such as the elite RICE U., Asian Ams numbers increased tremendously, while white numbers remained the same and black and latino numbers decreased. Black numbers decreased the most without preferential treatment.

Here are some stats which will give relative acceptance rates for each racial and ethnic group (% of acceptances divided by the % of applicants) at Brown and Penn from their respective newspapers. The Ivies rarely reveal racial stats because they are damning and show how unfair the admissions process really is. In fact, they don't release this type of info anymore.

From the 2/22/01 and 4/3/01 Brown Daily Herald:

Brown University Class of '05

16,500 applicants

Asian Americans: 20.3% of the applicants, 16% of the acceptances
African Americans: 6% of the applicants, 9% of the acceptances
Latino Americans: 7.1% of the applicants, 9% of the acceptances
Whites and others: 66.6% of the applicants, 66% of the acceptances

Asian Ams have the lowest acceptance rate of any racial or ethnic group, INCLUDING WHITES, at Brown for the Class of 2005. Asian American acceptance rates were as low as 60% to 70% of the white acceptance rates, and less than 50% of the black and latino acceptance rates. Asian Ams paid the HEAVIEST price, whites did not pay a price, because they were 66% of the the applicants and 66% of the acceptances in race based admissions in AA.

From the 2/12/01 The Daily Pennsylvanian (<a href="http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com%5B/url%5D):">www.dailypennsylvanian.com):</a>

Asian American applicants represent 31% of the 19,086 applicants for the University of Pennsylvanias Class of 2005 but only about 23% of the acceptances. UPenn accepts Asian Americans at a lower rate than any other group.

This is explained by the "biases" and stereotyping of Asian Americans as lacking in all the holistic aforementioned characteristics neccessy for admissions, except high test scores and GPAs, with only interests in biochem, music, and premed. This is the furtest from the truth and is simply a BIG LIE, which is subscribed to by many, especisially the adcoms of the elite colleges such as HYPS, because of ignorance, prejudice and discrimnation against Asian Ams.

One does not discrimnate against one of the smallest minorities in America, the Asian Ams, however politically insignicant they may appear to be today. Asian Ams, as an applicant group are required to meet a higher standard of achievement and a higher holistic criteria with the aforementioned charactistics in order to gain admission, even though they are admitted in percentages higher than their 4% of the total poulation, they are admitted at the lowest rates, lower than the white rates. Asian Ams are being punished and penalized unfairly.

The WASP majority did the same thing against Jews in the elite schools (HYPSMC, etc.), pre WW II and pre 1960s, but Jews took action and said no more, and they became the most overrepresented minority ethnic or religious group, becoming over 30% of Harvard for their 2.5% of the population. There is absolutely nothing wrong in this and it is only right because, as an applicant group, they are stellar. They are not subjected to anti-Jewish quotas anymore. What is wrong and immoral is that Asian Ams have become the Jews of old, or "today's Jews" , as UPenn's admissions dean, Lee Stetson, said, in the book, "Getting In: Inside The College Admissions Process", Addison-Wesley, Publishers, 1995, by Bill Paul, on pages 200 and 201. What happened to Jews pre WW II with anti-Jewish discrimnation in admissions is happening to Asian Americans today with the same prejudices and biases from the adcoms and those who favor racial preferences.

This is not ok, and there will be a day of reckoning on this issue.

ctymomteacher · October 24, 2004, 11:01am

ethioman, what's the point in directing hostility at another person who has to deal with similarly racist attitudes in at least some parts of the country? As I said above, where I live, Asians can't even get into the HS Honor Society, and the committee that taps the members is a secret group. You're directing your anger at the wrong target, I think. There's enough racism left in this culture to go around. We need to try to support each other, not undermine.

Northstarmom · October 24, 2004, 11:44am

What many forget is that Affirmative Action was started to make reparation for the damage that was done to African Americans by a US system that was created to prevent African Americans from doing things like becoming educated.

Some people look at the relative low rate of, for instance, high school graduation and college attendance among African Americans, and they say, "What's wrong with these people? Why can't they be like other minority groups and fully utilize the educational system?"

What's forgotten is that not only were African Americans s prevented from utilizing the educational system, their ties with their original cultures also were destroyed. Although probably many people who are on this thread assume that precolonial black Africa lacked literacy, for instance, that is not true. The Songhai kingdom, for instance, had libraries books, including books in Arabic and Latin.

Meanwhile, as part of US slavery, African slaves were forbidden to learn to read. Punishment was severe for those who got caught doing that.

After slavery, blacks were forbidden from going to school in many parts of the country. Segregated schools didn't just exist in the South, and where they existed, the disaparities were great between what the black students had in their schools and what white students had. Add to that, the black students also were taught by black teaches who had lacked excellent instruction.

I know a black man with a doctorate in engineering who is about age 50 and grew up in the rural south. He said that when he was in his (segregated) black middle school, he was taught that there was no such thing as negative numbers. When he went to high school, he was in the first group of black students to integrate the local high school. There, he found out that much of what he had been taught before was wrong. He managed to catch up because he was brilliant and because his mother thought to buy extra textbooks for him so he could learn things that the other students had learned when they were in middle school.

One of the first black astronauts had attended a segregated high school where the science "lab" was literally a bunsen burner. The white high school (which he walked by each day on his way to the segregated school) had a full science lab.

In Fla., until about 1945, it was the law that black students went to school for 6 months of the year while white students went 9 months a year. Why? So black children could be available to help (white) farmers in their fields.

The people who grew up like that are now the parents and grandparents of students who are in high school now. How can black parents and grandparents teach their offspring things that they never learned themselves?

Keep in mind, too, that when schools became forcibly integrated, the teachers who were allowed to teach were only the white teachers. The black teachers, administrators, etc. ended up having to go into other kinds of work.

Understandably, white teachers who had grown up in a segregated system in which they were taught and believed that they were superior to black people weren't likely to be supportive teachers of black students. They also weren't likely to want to involve black parents in things like the PTO. After all, these black people were people whom the whites had not -- until they were forced to -- had to even share a drinking fountain with.

Anyway, Affirmative Action (which, incidentally calls for the URM to get the job/opportunity when there are equally qualified candidates) is a very small effort to try to get African Americans on an equal footing with the rest of US society after centuries of having their culture destroyed and of being prevented from having the opportunities that allegedly were available to all.

ethioman00 · October 24, 2004, 12:58pm

You're right, I apologize for the unnecessary hostility. This issue just conjures up too much pent-up emotion, and that was essentially an illogical, pathos-infused post. I understand that Jews and Asians still suffer from discrimination across the world - one only need look at Switzerland or Russia to see the rising tides of Anti-Semitism, or in your case, the intellectual discrimination that Asians face daily. However, for some reason, blacks as a whole do terribly in education. I'm black. I have a 1550 SAT. I read a statistic somewhere saying that only 72 black people in the entire nation score that high every year. If only 72 black people are scoring above a 1550 SAT, and the middle 50% of scorers at a place like Harvard extends to 1590, how is a highly selective institution supposed to ensure that more than 3 or 4 token blacks arrive on campus? As far as I'm concerned, until the total percentage of blacks in college as a whole at least equals their percentage of the population, Affirmative Action should not only be employed, but expanded, to assure educational opportunities for all black Americans. That would mean a good 12% status across the board - of course University of Nebraska wouldn't have too many blacks, for geographic reasons, but schools like UCLA and Florida State could more than make up for this. And at the top schools, because these schools set their students up to achieve great things in life, definitley should be a reflection of the US population as a whole. That means more Hispanics (they're only 3% of the population at Harvard), more whites, more blacks (although not too many, Harvard reached 8.4% for their freshman class this year), and sorry to say, but less Asians. Asians are somethign like 3% of the American population, and make up 17% of the students at Harvard. That is a testament to Asian ingenuity and hard work - but it is a gross overrepresentation at the expense of blacks, Hispanics, and whites. If Ivies are truly the top schools in the nation, then they should directly reflect the population of which their students will eventually control.

rattle1 · October 24, 2004, 1:02pm

NSM said,

Job opportinities and racism in society in general are discusions for another forum.

You have not addressed any of the issues which I had raised or answered any of the questions posed.

We are talking about admissions into the elite colleges with racial preferential treatment for affluent blacks admitted with lowered standards, who are underperforming and underachieving. The vast majority of blacks admitted via AA to the elite colleges are affluent. These blacks are from the middle and upper economic classes, who have had all the opportunities in the world to obtain their affluence and their parental higher education with graduate degrees and more than 100k/year family incomes. Many of the admitted blacks are legacies of the first black beneficiaries of AA in the elite colleges (at Harvard, 6% of the legacy admits are black). Why should these blacks deserve preferential treatment based on race for admissions over a higher performing Asian Am or white who is living poverty? The intended targets of race based AA, recieve no benefit from AA. Only, the rich affluent underperforming blacks are admitted with lowered standards. The poorer, even more underperforming and more underachieving blacks from the lower economic classes are left out in the coild, and receive NO BENEFIT from AA. They were the intended beneficiaries of race based AA.

The original intent of AA has been corrupted to benefit affluent lower performing blacks admitted with lowered standards because of preferential treatment given to them based on the color of their skin alone. This is how race based AA has been CORRUPTED. Rich affluent blacks, who have more OPPORTUNITIES than 98% of all Americans, do not deserve favoratism and preferential treatment in admissions. These blacks have all the OPPORTUNITIES to go to excellent suburban schools, private prep schools, test prep, travel, libraries in their homes and schools, and college educated parents. These blacks don't deserve racial preferential treatment in admissions. This is how AA has been corrupted , simply because the crux of the problem or CAUSES haven't been addressed for the racial gaps in underperformance and underachievement of all blacks, especially AFFLUENT blacks. AFFLUENT blacks do not lack opportunity. The racial gaps in academic performance have not been narrowed, but has widen with AA.

Blacks TODAY have more than ample opportunity to attend colleges and to access a higher education among the 4000 institutions of higher in America, where 98% of all Americans of all races get their college educations. They can go to any of the 4000 colleges other than the elite colleges where they are underprepared, relatively speaking, when compared to their non-URM classmates. Prof. Daniel Tsui, Princeton physicist, is a prime example of the Asian success at overcoming poverty. He won a Nobel Prize in 1998. He was born to a peasant family in a remote village in Henan province in central China, attended school in Hong Kong and then got a college scholarship to Augustana College in Rock Island, Ill., leading to his research at the University of Chicago, Bell Laboratories and Princeton.

There was no AFFIRMATIVE ACTION for Prof. Tsui. He attended an obscure Luthern college in the midwest and flourished despite his background with destitute and illerate parents from a peasant village in China, overcoming floods, famines, drought and political upheavel of China.

American blacks today have much opportunity to attend college today. They have to seize the opportunity and race based AA for affluent and privileged blacks is not the solution for the ever-widening Black-White (Asian) Test Score Gap and academic performance gaps. Race based AA solves absolutely nothing, but causes more racial strife betwen the races.

There are NO LACK OF OPPORTUNITIES for blacks, even unqualified blacks to attend college today.

Race-based AA benefits only AFFLUENT lower performing and underachieving blacks in the elite colleges who have even more opportunities than even higher performing Asians and whites are living in poverty

The POOREST Asian Americans from families incomes of less than 20k/year with parents with a high school diploma or less outperform on the SAT I and achieve higher GPAs, and take more difficult courses than the richest blacks from family incomes of 100k/year and parents with college and graduate degrees. In fact, the poorest Asian Americans living in the poorest neighborhoods outperform whites in more affluent neighborhoods. That's the well known secret that the politically correct refuse to acknlowledge.

Source; The College Board

Fact #1

Black children from the wealthiest families have mean SAT scores lower than white children and Asian Americans from families below the poverty line.

Fact #2

Black children of parents with graduate degrees have lower SAT scores than white or Asian children of parents with a high-school diploma or less.

From the College Board data, you will discover that Asians mostly sit on top of the heap; that whites, Mexican Americans and blacks follow in that order. Some details prove interesting. For example, whites enjoy a verbal advantage over Asians that disappears at high levels of income and social advantage. Regrettably, the College Board no longer discloses these data. In 1996, they stopped publishing performance by income and parental education disaggregated by race and ethnicity.

Check out;

<a href="http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm</a>

for the actual data to verify the facts above.

The solution for closing these racial gaps of lower average achievement among ALL blacks and latinos is not the Band-Aid approach of race-based affirmative action.
It is solved by improving the K-12 schools for the lower economic classes which are disproportionately Black and Latino.

rattle1 · October 24, 2004, 2:24pm

Ethioman said,

This "gross overrepresentation (of Asian Ams)" IS NOT at the expense of blacks, Hispanics, and whites. That's the point you missed completely. Asian Ams have more than earned their spots in the elite colleges, and many more who have earn it based on their stellar characteristics are denied at MUCH HIGHER RATES THAN WHITES, because Asian Ams with the same characteristics of admitted whites (stats, ECs, leadership, etc) are denied. Asian Americans are required to have a higher level of achievement than any other group to be admitted . That's the injustice. Studies from Brown and Stanford have proven this point without question.

In other words, whites, blacks and URMs are being admitted at the EXPENSE of Asian American stellar applicants.

Please read this again, "Asian Ams paid the heaviest price. whites did not pay a price, and blacks received the biggest gain with the use of this demented, unfair and immoral policy of racial preferential treatment in AA with admissions. The proof of my statement lies in the fact that, where ever and whenever race based AA is abolished, as in the U.of Texas-Austin, U.of California Berkeley and UCLA, U.of Washington, and even in the private schools such as the elite RICE U., Asian Ams numbers increased tremendously, while white numbers remained the same and black and latino numbers decreased. Black numbers decreased the most without preferential treatment."

Asian Ams are 4% of the American population, not the 3% you stated..

Now, let us consider the Jewish % at Harvard. Harvard is over 30% Jewish. Jews are 2.5% of the American population. I do not have a problem with this. Do you have a problem with this? Yet, you have a problem with Asian Ams being 17% of Harvard while being 4% of the American population. Jews are over 30% of Harvard, the most overrepresented ethnic and religious group at Harvard. They were admitted at no one's expense and without anti-Jewish quotas. I have no problem with the Jews' "gross overrpresentation". Jews are not classified as Jews by the adcoms.There is no box to check off on the applicant for Jews.

Now, Asian Ams are subjected to a de facto quota because of "diversity' and are unfairly and immorally limited and capped in their numbers, with whites, blacks, latinos admitted at their expense.

Asian Ams are 42% of UC Berkeley without racial quotas or AA. Asian Am are 20% of the U.of Texas-Austin and they are less than 3% of Texas' population when race based AA was abolished. They are even 25% of Stanford with its quota against Asian Ams.

If the de facto quota against Asian Ams were abolished and race based AA dropped at Harvard, Asian Ams would most certainly be more than 17%, or maybe at least over 30% or 40% at Harvard. If you don't have a problem with Jews being over 30% of Harvard, then you should not have a problem with Harvard being at 30% or more Asian Ams, because Jews are 2.5% while Asian Am are 4% of the population.

I don't have a problem with Harvard at 30% Jews, a most stellar group, yet you have a problem with Harvard being 17% Asian Ams, let alone more than 30% or even 40%, because they are also a most stellar group of applicants.

So ethioman, who is being admitted at the expense of whom? Whites, blacks, latinos, are being admitted at the expense of Asians with the for of caps or limiting quotas against Asian Ams. The admission data which I presented proves this.

If you wanted proportional representation of the population, you should go to a school without rase based AA giving racial preferences to blacks, latinos. There are close to 4000 comunnity colleges, 4 year colleges and universities which do not have race based AA. There is ample OPPORTUNITY for a underprepared black or URM or an Asian or a white to attend of these schools. (8% of the degrees are conferred by these other schools which do not practice AA.

Prof. Tsui did, and he won the Nobel in Physics in 1998.

rattle1 · October 24, 2004, 2:32pm

Correction of post above:

If you wanted proportional representation of the population, you should go to a school without race based AA, giving racial preferences to blacks, and latinos. There are close to 4000 comunnity colleges, 4 year colleges and universities which do not have race based AA. There is ample OPPORTUNITY for an underprepared black or URM or an Asian or a white to attend of these schools. 98% of the degrees given to Americans are conferred by these other schools which do not practice AA.

Prof. Tsui did, and he won the Nobel in Physics in 1998. So can an underprepared black or URM attend attend one of these other 4000 colleges which do not practice race preferences.

ctymomteacher · October 24, 2004, 5:59pm

Northstarmom, I went to a high school that was merged with a predominantly Black high school the second year I attended. I just need to point out that the most professional teacher I ever had at that school was a chemistry teacher who was African American. He was not the only African American who survived the merger. It was simply not true, at least in that "forcible intergration," that only the white staff was permitted to continue. Of course, this was in the late sixties and early seventies, and maybe things had improved by then, but I think it is helpful to acknowledge the facts in such cases. (I can still QUOTE the man, and I'm 50 and do nothing with chemistry!)

remom · October 24, 2004, 6:59pm

Ethio man you're an arrogant person. You probably have people move to the other side of the street because your racist attitude and chip on your shoulder are maybe something that you are unaware of, that people are reading. And guess what, people move to the other side of the street when they see white males too. Like it or not, we all have profiles in our heads that are typically based on what we have experienced. Instead of blaming old whitie, maybe you should ask yourself what is it about yourself that makes people pull you over, follow you or move to the other side of the road. If you have been brought up to scapegoat skin color, well, lots of luck. Maybe next time you want to blame the world for your problems, look at yourself. Put a smile on your face and nod when you see others.
Further, no one can change someone's impression of you, but you. Ignorant behavior on other people's part still does not have anything to do with blacks getting more help than asian or white applicants. So you deal with it! I suggest you read a black author "Thomas Sowell", get your act together and prove that you measure up. 
Further, when someone is trying to argue the points of affirmative action, do you mind if we stay out of the fifties, for gosh sakes! 
s Unfortunately for you, hip hop culture, gangs, o.j.juries, and the like have made people more leary of the "Young black male".

Thread		Replies	Views
Why is it hard for Asians to get into Yale?? Yale University	94	869	April 17, 2021
are colleges racist? Parents Forum	4720	18247	April 14, 2021
Harvard quotas???? Harvard University	135	387	April 17, 2021
Does being Asian American help or hurt your chances at getting in at top schools? Applying to College	62	186	April 16, 2021
whats a URM? Princeton University	30	5692	April 17, 2021

Minorities?

POPULAR STATES

SEARCH SAT SCORES

SEARCH ACT SCORES

SEARCH GPA’S

Minorities?

Related Topics

POPULAR STATES

SEARCH SAT SCORES

SEARCH ACT SCORES

SEARCH GPA’S

CONNECT WITH US