<p>First of all -- NO ethnicity will help you get into college.</p>
<p>First of all...NO ethnicity will "help you get into college." That is a common misconception about the way affirmative action and diversity programs work, and that's NOT the way it works. If you don't have the grades and record to get yourself into a college, you won't get in and it doesn't matter if you are underrespresented or not. That is WHY certain minorities are underrepresented in schools; we don't do as well on standardized tests and we often don't have the same opportunities for pre-college prep as overrepresented groups, therefore we don't get in. If that was the way affirmative action worked, each school would have a perfect balance of races that reflected the United States' racial makeup.</p>
<p>Shad Faraz - the reason that you don't like the idea of affirmative action is because you don't understand how it works. Not exactly your fault, as this stereotype is what the media and a lot of people put forward.</p>
<p>The goal of affirmative action is to increase the representation of certain minority groups in the school. Think about the way admissions are done right now. They don't take the 5000 highest SAT scores and GPAs, right? They take a combination of factors into account -- SAT scores, GPA, essays, extra-curriculars, etc. AA is a policy that allows them to take race into account as well in much the same way as they take into account SAT scores.</p>
<p>Schools usually don't have cut-off scores for the SAT. Similarly, schools don't have "quotas" or certain amounts of minority students that they want to admit. It's just another factor that they take into consideration in order to balance their class. You know we say that hypothetical situation sometimes where if a kid is on the borderline, they have that little extra something like being a prima ballerina or a great painter or a lot of volunteer hours or a quirky essay that tips them over? Race can act quite the same way. On their own, it won't get you in and it won't keep you out.</p>
<p>A lot of people will say "Well, that's not fair. I can't control the fact that I'm not an underrepresented minority." But the purpose of it is to try to stabilize historical inequities. It's not just because of the color of their skin; it's because the color of their skin exposes them to prejudices that closes off many opportunities that non-minorities are able to have. For example, a small majority of African Americans in the U.S. live in urban areas with failing schools, whereas only about 1/3 of whites live in city centers. No matter how hard the students who go to these schools work, they may not ever be able to make the high SAT scores or participate in the extra-curriculars students in more affluent neighborhoods are able to get. There is also a large income gap between white people and black and Hispanic people; this means that black families will be able to afford less amenities like private schools, after-school programs, summer camps, and private lessons.</p>
<p>Just like a white student cannot control that they are not an underrepresented minority, a black or Hispanic student cannot control that they do not have access to these things.</p>
<p>And I am not trying to say that there are no poor white students or that all white students have access to these things -- of course they don't, which is why other factors are also taken into consideration. But students in underrepresented groups are many times more likely to have these kinds of problems.</p>
<p>To julliet: the thing you said about color of skin and how many opportunities are closed of to them. South Asians aren't exactly white. They are brown and often are faced with similar barriers. </p>
<p>Do not get me wrong. I absolutely love the idea of giving underprivileged students who have shown to work hard despite obstacles a bit of an advantage in the admissions process. But my thing is, it should NOT be based on race. Because right now it is assming all URMs are not exposed to the 'proper' training that is needed for Ivys/Top Colleges. Like you said, there are many white, poor kids that do not get the same benefit as the URMs. I am not white or anything, but the the point i am trying to make is: Take a look at this situation..</p>
<p>Poor White Kid... Rich Black Kid.
Similar Stats... The black student has higher chance of making it to top college. Your argument does not apply here because the Caucasian student is not being exposed to the opportunities that the well of , african american student is being exposed to. </p>
<p>My Only problem with the whole thing is to get rid of the whole race thing in all of this. i feel sorry for the East Asians with 2200 SATs and being called 'average Asian' and not getting accepted to any Ivys. If you must help a certain race, then go ahead, but do not bring down another race just because they are at a high achieving level. </p>
<p>I know people are going to think i am insensitive.. This is just how i honestly feel about the issue. Looking from different perspectives, too many deserving people get screwed with affirmative action. While it helps some, it also screws over others. I do not think there is any denying that. Then again, what do i know?</p>
<p>jaf:Not All of them are undeserving, but you cannot argue the fact that many 2000 SATs wouldn't get into Ivy if not for their URM status.</p>
<p>^^ I did not bother reading it all because the first sentence is all wrong. Being an URM will help you get into college. Even if you have horrid stats and looking for a crap school, you have a better chance of getting in than a ORM. It is all statistics. Besides, no body mentioned applying to Harvard with a -.352 GPA and expecting a skin pigment to get them in. Come on, we are on CC.</p>
<p>I agree with whoever said that all latinos are URMs. I know that central america is definitely under represented in college. Where my mom is from, they're worse off than mexico with all the third world stuff</p>
<p>@juillet: I agree with the concept behind AA, but the execution is seriously flawed. If its ultimate goal is what you say, why not base it on socioeconomic status instead of race? (Because that would cost colleges too much in FA.)</p>
<p>^ Lol, you already got the answer.</p>
<p>At Gabs, it is true that all latino's are URM, but there are divisions. Mexicans and Puerto Ricans are "more URM" that other latinos, but as you said, they are still all URMs.</p>
<p>Shad Faraz: I never said South Asians were white.</p>
<p>In the previous example (poor white kid vs. rich black kid), you're right about the black kid having a better chance of making it, but not because he's black -- because he's rich and has had opportunities the poor white child was not exposed to. I already explained that the model that I give does not apply to all cases. But when sociologists and college admissions officers study this kind of thing, they have to study in terms of averages and likelihoods. Beyond that, racism carries some burdens that even class privilege cannot take away.</p>
<p>I don't feel sorry for anyone with a 2200 on the SAT, even if they didn't get into any Ivies. You can have a successful and happy life without going to Harvard. Affirmative action is not "bringing down another race". Once again, this example (of the Asian student with a 2200 getting rejected because she's considered average) is largely a myth. Asian students are <em>overrepresented</em> at universities, which means that they are generally not getting turned down in larger numbers than other students.</p>
<p>madden15: You're absolutely wrong; you can believe what you want to believe, but any admissions counselor will tell you that being black, Latino, whatever, won't help you get into college. It's just not true. If it were true, than they wouldn't be UNDERREPRESENTED. That's the whole meaning of the word "underrepresented" -- these kids are not getting in and going to these universities. If being an underrepresented minority helped students get into college, all elite universities would have a perfect balance of minorities that mirrors the U.S. racial make-up (approximately 65% white, 13% African American, 14% Latino, 5% Asian and the other 3% of other ethnicities/races). Now that's statistics.</p>
<p>The new FAQ thread </p>
<p>will provide answers to the thread-opening question, and to the several related questions that have come up in replies here. Follow the links in the FAQ thread for more details.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wow, only CC kids would subdivide URMs/ORMs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You'd be surprised. Only a couple of years ago, the AAMC (the association that administers the MCAT and processes med school application) defined Hispanic URM's (for the purpose of med school admissions) as only Mexicans and mainland Puerto Ricans.</p>
<p>
[quote]
we are expected to mark this down on our application
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not a factually correct statement. All ethnicity questions on all college forms are OPTIONAL, and you can decline to say anything in response to those questions. </p>
<p>Here are some selective colleges with high percentages of students reported as "race unknown." </p>
<p>(22 percent at Case Western) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Case Western Reserve University - Case - At a Glance </p>
<p>(21 percent at Cornell) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Cornell University - At a Glance </p>
<p>(21 percent at William and Mary) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - College of William and Mary - CWM - At a Glance </p>
<p>(21 percent at Brandeis) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Brandeis University - At a Glance </p>
<p>(20 percent at Amherst College) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Amherst College - At a Glance </p>
<p>(18 percent at Princeton) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Princeton University - At a Glance </p>
<p>(18 percent at Reed College) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Reed College - At a Glance </p>
<p>(16 percent at Chicago) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - University of Chicago - Chicago - At a Glance </p>
<p>(15 percent at Penn) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - University of Pennsylvania - Penn - At a Glance </p>
<p>(14 percent at Pomona) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Pomona College - At a Glance </p>
<p>(13 percent at Harvard) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Harvard College - At a Glance </p>
<p>(13 percent at Brown) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Brown University - Brown - At a Glance </p>
<p>(13 percent at Vanderbilt) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Vanderbilt University - Vandy - At a Glance </p>
<p>(12 percent at Carnegie Mellon) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Carnegie Mellon University - At a Glance </p>
<p>(11 percent at Yale) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Yale University - At a Glance </p>
<p>(11 percent at Columbia) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Columbia University - Columbia - At a Glance </p>
<p>(10 percent at NYU) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - New York University - NYU - At a Glance </p>
<p>(10 percent at Agnes Scott) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Agnes Scott College - ASC - At a Glance </p>
<p>(9 percent at Whitman) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Whitman College - At a Glance </p>
<p>(8 percent at Washington U in St. Louis) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Washington University in St. Louis - Washington U. - At a Glance </p>
<p>(7 percent at Berkeley) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - University of California: Berkeley - Cal - At a Glance </p>
<p>(6 percent at MIT) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - Massachusetts Institute of Technology - MIT - At a Glance </p>
<p>(6 percent at Virginia) </p>
<p>College</a> Search - University of Virginia - UVA - At a Glance</p>
<p>^^ (I'm not about to quote that whole post) Anyways, I've always wondered about that. Are admission officers REALLY ethnicity-blind if you choose to not report your ethnicity? Is there some kind of stigma that officers place on these applicants? Or are they in fact treated as though they were white applicants? </p>
<p>Food for thought.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Are admission officers REALLY ethnicity-blind if you choose to not report your ethnicity?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There are legal penalties for making false reports to the federal government, so if many</a> colleges report a lot of students as "race/ethnicity unknown" that must be because the colleges really don't know--even after asking--and really don't care. </p>
<p>The FAQ thread </p>
<p>has links to federal regulations on this issue.</p>
<p>tokenadult, just because colleges report a large number of race-unknown students doesn't mean that they are not using the indicator or lack thereof as a factor in admission.</p>
<p>My (cynical) view is that the adcoms treat you as an ORM unless the rest of your application makes it obvious otherwise. Which may or may not be to your benefit--but either way, refusing the question is more a matter of principle than a huge factor on admission.</p>
<p>Keil, do you mean that you believe adcoms treat race-unknown apps as Asian-American unless the surname doesn't sound Asian?</p>
<p>At private schools that want a diverse campus, don't we all assume that adcoms consider race/ethnicity/culture (from all available info) along with all other factors, that they are NOT ethnicity-blind?</p>
<p>
[quote]
any admissions counselor will tell you that being black, Latino, whatever, won't help you get into college. It's just not true. If it were true, than they wouldn't be UNDERREPRESENTED.
[/quote]
It can indeed help some students, without enough being helped to prevent under-representation.</p>
<p>I think adcoms treat race-known apps as white unless the surname or essay (if about cultural values, etc., it'd be a dead giveaway) indicates otherwise. Maybe they can't acknowledge that consciously, but subconsciously it's likely a factor.</p>
<p>I have mixed feelings about AA--it's fair for the truly disadvantaged minorities, but it also hurts ORMs and unfairly helps assimilated upper-class minorities who have all the advantages of privilege, plus the minority tip.</p>