<p>Cookiemom said, </p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>The point is that kids who come from well educated families with a high SES have advantages that come into play well before high school. SES has a huge impact on SAT scores, grades, EC's and eventual college admissions. That's why schools are now scrambling to figure out ways to attract and admit less privileged students. <<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Again, there are HIGH scoring students who are also poor. They are Asian Americans.</p>
<p>The SAT and Racial Politics</p>
<p>[Although Atkinson says that the UC must set high standards, he also says that since California has a highly diverse racial and ethnic population, the UC must be careful to make sure that its standards do not unfairly discriminate against any students.16 According to Atkinsons logic, because he believes the SAT keeps African-American and Hispanic students out of the UC, the test thus discriminates against these groups, so therefore it must be eliminated. Of course, he does not say why poor Asian-American students, many of whom come from the same or similar neighborhoods and schools as African-American and Hispanic students, do just fine on the SAT. Addressing such a point would not be politically or racially correct.]</p>
<p>==========================================</p>
<p>Poor high achieving Asian Americans have become the torn on the sides of the racial engineers, who seek proportional racial representation to the American population in elite colleges. You cannot have this, if the college is to remain elite, no matter what standards or criteria you use for admissions. The one exception is to admit based soley on race alone or the color of one's skin, but standards are lowered and the school is not elite anymore. If one wanted proportional racial representation to the American population in colleges, one should attend the other colleges in America which do not use race as a factor in admissions, but don't go to the several hundred colleges which use race as factor to admit. One can attend the other 4000 institutions of higher learning in America, which do not use race as a factor for admissions. There is nothing wrong with doing this. Over 98% of Americans who received degrees attended these schools. There is ample opportunity for blacks, and URMs or a student of any race or ethnic group to attain a college education. </p>
<p>Students should attend schools for which they are academically prepared or fitted for. A student with 500 points below the SAT I mean of the school simply should not be in the school, because his chance of graduation is lessen, and if he graduates, he will graduate at the bottom of the class, taking the least rigorous courses of study. This causes an extreme disservice to this unprepared student, as well as to the better prepared student whom he displaced in the elite college.</p>
<p>45% of UC Berkeley, 40% of UCLA, 60% of UC Irvine, 35% of UC San Diego are Asian Americans. Asian Americans are 12% of California's population. Asian Americans are the biggest group in the jewels of the UC system, which consists of some of the most academically elite and competitive colleges in the nation, either public or private, as represented by the present racial and ethnic composition of its student body. Asian Americans still will be the biggest group in this system, no matter what the standards and criteria for admissions are, including the new "Comprehensive Review", using life's obstacles and experiences as a plus factor in admissions.</p>
<p>According to the racial enginneers, there are just plain TOO MANY Asian Americans in UC Berkeley, UCLA and the UC system, because race was eliminated as a factor for admissions with Prop 209. There are also too many Asian Americans in the Ivies at 15%, out of proportion to their 4% in the American population, but the Ivies have de facto limiting RACIAL quotas against Asian Americans, a most illustrious group of applicants, justified by achieving "diversity".</p>
<p>To all the Moms and Dads on this thread:</p>
<p>Academic performance is not all about being raised in the middle and upper economic classes. The performance of the poorest Asian Americans debunks your points about economic advantage. No one on this thread has addressed the following, because it is not POLITICALLY AND RACIALLY CORRECT. You are towing the politically correct line like a herd of sheep being lead to slaughter, without addressing these points. Academic performance may just be about the culture of the student, regardless of economic class and parental education. Asian Americans respect education as a family value, a cultural value and as a Confucian value, as written in the Confucian Analects, which all transcend economic class. These values permeate throughout all classes, from the peasantry to nobility in China. The scholar is held in higher esteem than all other individuals in society. Therefore academic achievement is more related to culture than anything else, including economic class.</p>
<p>HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING? </p>
<p>The POOREST Asian Americans from family 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 with black neighbors attending black schools outperform many whites in more affluent neighborhoods. That's the well known DARK secret that the politically correct refuse to acknowledge.</p>
<p>Source; The College Board</p>
<p>Fact #1</p>
<p>Black children from the wealthiest families have mean SAT scores lower than white children and Asian Americans from families below the poverty line.</p>
<p>Fact #2 </p>
<p>Black children of parents with graduate degrees have lower SAT scores than white and Asian American children of parents with a high-school diploma or less. </p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>Check out;</p>
<p>APPENDIX B. SAT 1995 DATA AND GRAPHS</p>
<p>1995 SAT Scores vs. Family Income</p>
<p>1995 SAT Scores vs. Parental Education </p>
<p>for the actual data to verify the facts above.</p>
<p>To better under the reasons for high academic performance by any racial or ethnic group, you must consider the facts above. </p>
<p>As far as the Nobel Prizes are concerned, Prof. Daniel C. Tsui, a Chinese American immigrant with illiterate peasant poverty striken parents fighting famine, floods, drought and political upheaval, won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1998. He is a distinguished professor at Princeton today.</p>
<p>Please click on the following to read his autobiography and his road to the Nobel Prize:</p>
<p>Excerpts from his autobiography:</p>
<p>[My childhood memories are filled with the years of drought, flood and war which were constantly on the consciousness of the inhabitants of my over-populated village, but also with my parents' self-sacrificing love and the happy moments they created for me. Like most other villagers, my parents never had the opportunity to learn how to read and write. They suffered from their illiteracy and their suffering made them determined not to have their children follow the same path at any and whatever cost to them. In early 1951, my parents seized the first and perhaps the only opportunity to have me leave them and their village to pursue education in so far away a place that neither they nor I knew how far it truly was.]</p>
<p>[Many of my friends and esteemed colleagues had asked me: "Why did you choose to leave Bell Laboratories and go to Princeton University?". Even today, I do not know the answer. Was it to do with the schooling I missed in my childhood? Maybe. Perhaps it was the Confucius in me, the faint voice I often heard when I was alone, that the only meaningful life is a life of learning. What better way is there to learn than through teaching!]</p>