<p>I heard that the only types of hispanic that get a leg up in admissions are mexicans and puerto ricans. Any truth to this?</p>
<p>Don't think so.</p>
<p>Before California banned affirmative action, the UCs specified that it only applied to Chicanos, and not all Latinos.</p>
<p>There's variants of latinos that aren't counted as URMs? Huh???</p>
<p>We need more banning of AA.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Before California banned affirmative action, the UCs specified that it only applied to Chicanos, and not all Latinos.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You mean before they banned racial preferences.</p>
<p>California is still allowed to reach out to disadvantaged students of all races. In fact, this had led to increased graduation rates in both high schools and universities.</p>
<p>Anyway, in my opinion, I would be very surprised if there were more Hispanics of Venezuelan heritage at American universities than Hispanics of Mexican heritage.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I heard that the only types of hispanic that get a leg up in admissions are mexicans and puerto ricans.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>They are not the only groups of hispanics but they are the most underrepresented. So while not an absolute as YMMV, it is true these groups get a larger tip.</p>
<p>What is going on?</p>
<p>I'm Colombian, is that not going to benefit me?</p>
<p>How do schools determine if you're an URM? Is it by nationality, race, or what... I'm just wondering because I've been arguing with my friend about it... he's Cuban but is lighter skinned than me (I'm Italian), does he get the benefits simply because he's hispanic or does someone need to "look" hispanic?</p>
<p>lithiumonsundays,</p>
<p>Typically, you check one of the following boxes:</p>
<ol>
<li>Black / African-American</li>
<li>Hispanic</li>
<li>Native American</li>
</ol>
<p>Your friend gets the benefits simply because he is Hispanic.</p>
<p>The "Hispanic look" is actually a mix between Spanish blood and Native American blood. That's why I don't refer to Hispanic as a race.</p>
<p>Another question about URM's: are Nigerian immigrants (permanent residents) considered URM's?</p>
<p>While nigerians would be categorized as blacks and being underrepresented, they are over represented in the african american pool of candidates because most schools are cognizant of the fact that most of the african american students are the children of recent immigrants from the carribean and African and are making more of an effort to recruit african americans with multigenerational roots in the U.S.</p>
<p>sybbie,</p>
<p>How do these schools "[make] more of an effort to recruit african americans with multigenerational roots in the U.S.?"</p>
<p>And, by extension, how do they do the same for Mexicans and Puerto Ricans?</p>
<p>From the harvard magazine article Roots and Race:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Haynie went through copies of the Harvard Freshman Register and, based on the photographs therein, contacted fellow students who looked black. She also located subjects through Harvard's black student organizations and black undergraduate listservs. Her sample, though not random, was large enough to yield at least some data on nearly a quarter of black undergraduates, by her estimate. Using questionnaires and interviews, Haynie found that, while a clear majority identified themselves as "black American," African and Afro-Caribbean identifiers combined made up more than a third of the subjects, and her "bi-ethnic or bi-racial" category accounted for about a quarter .</p>
<p>Turning to ancestry, Haynie found that although first-generation (immigrants born outside the United States) black Americans showed up in her study in numbers proportionate to the U.S. Census, second-generation (born in the United States, with at least one parent born overseas) blacks made up 41 percent of her Harvard pool—but only about 3 percent of black Americans (see table). Fourth- (and higher) generation African Americans, who represent nearly 90 percent of the American black population, accounted for only 45 percent of the black students she studied. In pursuing her research, Haynie recalls meeting resistance from Harvard deans and admissions officials. "They were saying, 'You shouldn't be trying to divide students along ethnic lines,'" she says. "But they're already divided! Just look at the data."</p>
<p>African Americans, who account for 13 percent of the U.S. population, are statistically underrepresented at Harvard and other selective colleges. Black students descended from multiple generations of American forebears may be underrepresented to an even greater degree. Within the United States, there are also regional differences: West Indian and African immigrants, for example, have predominantly settled on the East Coast. "Boston, Hartford, and Miami all have large West Indian populations," says Waters. "And in New York City, more than half the blacks are first- or second-generation immigrants." Haynie, who hails from the Carolinas, notes, "In the South, you don't have the diversity that you do in the North. Southern black Americans are very often the descendents of slaves." (Of course, many West Indian and African families also are slave descendents.)</p>
<p>"Harvard could do a better job of recognizing the differences between black students. The tendency is to see it as 'a black face is a black face,'" says Haynie. "On the admissions form, you could put down where your parents and grandparents were born. If you have two black applicants, one from the American South, the other from the Caribbean, the black American may have come a lot further than the Caribbean student." Waters says, "If it's only skin color, that's a very narrow definition of diversity. I would hate to see Harvard not reaching out to those African Americans who have been in the United States for generations. Are we not looking as hard as we should in Mississippi or Alabama for kids who would do well if they were recruited?"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Elite schools are now trying to reach out more geographically (southern states, the delta, etc) where the likely hood is greater of finding African american students with multi-generational roots in the U.S. </p>
<p>In addition, you notice that there have been changes in the application. They now ask where were you born, and if you are a permanent resident (green card holder) they ask your original country of origin (this change has just been in the past 2 of years) as an effort to get a better sense get to the next level.</p>
<p>sybbie,</p>
<p>If these people really think they can get away with discriminating against Carribean and African immigrants and their children, then they should be more careful from now on. They are treading on dangerously thin ice.</p>
<p>There is no way that these Americans, as young as their roots are, will tolerate such blatant discrimination. This is akin to the grandfather clause in principle.</p>
<p>It's a shame how perverted the idea that we should not discriminate based on color or national origin has become.</p>
<p>they aren't discriminating, what are you even talking about? They have every right to ask if it helps them get a diverse environment. Stop trying to turn everything into discrimination.</p>
<p>Fab,</p>
<p>They will are not being discriminated against. </p>
<p>For example: when a attend a school with an asian population, are all students chinese? No, while you will have students that are chinese, japanese, east indian, korean, vietnamese students, laotian students are underpresented amongst asians. Each group brings a different perspective to campus. Same concept.</p>
<p>Tyler and sybbie,</p>
<p>I'm surprised that Ms. Haynie has ignored the power of the most fundamental principle of economics - people respond to incentives.</p>
<p>She is proposing and supporting a revision that would punish certain Americans for having the "wrong" ancestry and heritage.</p>
<p>In essence, like the following conversation:</p>
<p>~~~
Ms. Haynie: "So, where did your parents come from?"</p>
<p>John Michael Akinola / Charles Dulcio: "I'm sorry, what does that have to do with my application for admission?"</p>
<p>Ms. Haynie: "We're just interested in learning more about you."</p>
<p>John Michael Akinola / Charles Dulcio: "That sounded a lot like, 'We're trying to figure out whether you contribute to a diverse environment or not.' My parents are American, and I am American."</p>
<p>Ms. Haynie: "I know your parents are citizens. I know you're American. I'm asking where they came from."</p>
<p>John Michael Akinola / Charles Dulcio: "What if I don't tell you?"</p>
<p>Ms. Haynie: "Let's see...Akinola / Dulcio, that's a Nigerian / Haitian name. Thank you for your time. Have a nice day!"
~~~</p>
<p>According to Dictionary.com, discriminate is a verb that means to make a distinction in favor of or against a person or thing on the basis of the group, class, or category to which the person or thing belongs rather than according to actual merit; show partiality. Sounds a lot like Ms. Haynie's proposition. She's making distinctions among Black students on the basis of how deep their American roots are as opposed to their merits.</p>
<p>We have yet another historical irony from the same crowd. The grandfather clause that was once used to keep Blacks from voting is now being considered as a method for granting the "right" Blacks preferential treatment. Hilarious and sad at the same time.</p>
<p>If Ms. Haynie's system is ever enacted, which I highly doubt given its comic potential for discrimination, I predict many Americans will change their last names to more American-sounding ones and lie about the birthplace of their parents and grandparents. If the "diversity" crowd pushes for more irrelevant family history information, like previous last names, I foresee massive lawsuits and more lying on applications.</p>
<p>If you guys think for one second that you're going to get away with a modern adaptation of the grandfather clause, wake up. This is 2007, not 1907.</p>
<p>what are you even talking about? nobodies being punished for anything. If an AMERICAN college wants a diverse population reflective of AMERICA and asking country of orgin helps them, then that's a plus. I think that people like you are the only ones would consider changing their names solely for college admissions, because it's just a stupid idea. </p>
<p>With your definition, technically upper middle class people are discriminated against in college admissions. As well as black people benefiting from AA. In fact, by your definition everyone is being discriminated against, so does it really matter?</p>
<p>Immigrant african americans aren't being punished, they just become an immigrant hook as opposed to an african american hook. I think that you are one of few who shares this "everyone whose not black is a victim" mentality. </p>
<p>And what would people press lawsuits on. You can't sue a private university if it has academic reason behind it. And maybe some people will leave it blank, that doesn't mean anything accept that just won't be considered in their admissions. </p>
<p>Frankly, you're basically a college admissions radical who believes everybody shares your over-the-top sentiments that they need to change their name and blatantly lie all over their application in order to get admitted to elite private schools, which is the only thing that matters to them, that nobody is even forcing them to apply to. </p>
<p>Well wake up call, 99% of people don't care that much. You try hard, you apply, if you get in you get in, if you don't you don't. There is no "getting away" with anything. If the university wants this information, it can ask for it. </p>
<p>What this basically means is that only african americans with generational roots in the US will get that diversity tip in admissions. So it is in face improving a system that you and other AA bashers said was flawed. Without the reason that AA only benefits immigrants, i think you realize that there's no way you'd be able to counter support of AA.</p>
<p>I think this is a step forward in the system and only leads to universities thriving and more reflective college campuses.</p>
<p>Tyler,</p>
<p>Let's make a bet.</p>
<p>You think that a modern application of the grandfather clause to college admissions will result in "a step forward in the system" and "[lead] to universities thriving and more reflective college campuses."</p>
<p>OK. I'll support you on this one, but not for your reasons.</p>
<p>I believe that if enacted, Ms. Haynie's proposal will lead to the dissolution of the "diversity" movement. It will crumble into petty factions and lose its unity. Some factions will support asking the irrelevant question, "Where were your grandparents born?" as a means of determining who is authentic and who is recent. Others will be against such a discriminatory question.</p>
<p>So, go ahead. Support this twenty-first century rendition of one of the worst instances of Jim Crow laws. It failed in the 1960s. It'll fail again.</p>