<p>Totally hypothetically here, what would be the status of an adopted child that was:</p>
<p>a) biologically black and raised in an all-white family.
b) biologically white and raised in an all-black family.</p>
<p>Which one would have an admissions advantage?</p>
<p>And what about an adopted child whose exact ancestry is unknown but looks like he could be biracial?</p>
<p>So do multi-racial or bi-racial people have an admissions advantage over "pure" African American or are all of them lumped into the "URM" category?</p>
<p>Not sure, but there is a box on the common app that clearly says bi-racial (of more than on race) and it says check all that apply, so there should be no confusion. </p>
<p>^^probably not, but i wont be surprised if his integrity is questioned, going as far as to verify if anything else was placed or marked by "accident"</p>
<p>b) biologically white and raised in an all-black family.</p>
<p>the apps say african-american, black </p>
<p>b/c you were raised in a black family doesnt make you black. same as bieng raised in a homosexual family doesnt make you homosexual.</p>
<p>a) biologically black and raised in an all-white family.</p>
<p>The student would be "black" since in this country, one's race is determined by one's genetics.</p>
<p>b) biologically white and raised in an all-black family.
"White."</p>
<p>Both potentially could write very interesting essays that could help them stand out in the admissions pool. Applicant "b" would have the stronger advantage because such situations are rare though I have known 2 white adults who had experiences as foster children in black families in black neighborhoods.</p>
<p>Question:
If an applicant's mother was born in Africa, could the applicant legally check African American on the application? </p>
<p>Father: born in Asia, of Asian ancestry
Mother: born in Africa, of Asian ancestry
Applicant child: born in U.S</p>
<p>Can the applicant legally check African-American on the application?</p>
<p>^^I think that simply for the purposes of racial diversity, applicant "a" would have at least an equal advantage compared to applicant "b." I know I've seen a lot of disadvantaged whites get rejected with the same stats that got a few blacks into top colleges. Clearly, applicant "a" does not have any less of an advantage at all. My HS does not have very many disadvantaged hispanics/blacks, but they still get in at a much higher rate than the white applicants. I don't think admissions cares AS much about how disadvantaged you are; they care about having racial diversity.
This is all a generalization though. I'm sure there are exceptions to what I'm saying here...</p>
<p>For the last time the Common app and all other applications i have seen say </p>
<p>African American- Black. Where your parents are born has no bearing on their race.</p>
<p>^Correct. They mean black. They're talking about ethnicity, not nationality.</p>
<p>Does anyone have the answer to the following:</p>
<p>And what about an adopted child whose exact ancestry is unknown but looks like he could be biracial?</p>
<p>I think soozviet is wrong. It's insanity to say that checking off Af-Am status doesn't help you with college admissions. It definitely does! It's not going to get you IN, but if you think it doesn't affect decisions, you are simply wrong. It is quite a large push. I read somewhere that being African American is the equivalent of adding 200 or 300 points to your SAT score (I don't remember exactly, but it was a large number), based on the stats of nonhooked applicants who have been admitted. It is dishonest and taking advantage of the affirmitive action system to lie about your ethnicity and get such a big boost as that. </p>
<p>I totally sympathize with g2g4gold for being hacked off that somebody else got into Columbia because he lied when gold was honest with his app and got rejected. If I had not gotten into Yale and had found out that a classmate of mine had pulled off something like that, I'd be absolutely fuming! Of course the OP is jealous! He has every right! It's one thing to be angry that somebody beat you to Columbia fair-and-square, but it's something else when somebody gets in because they LIED. And yes, it's not like the cheater "stole" the OP's space (not really, anyway) but what he did was still fundamentally wrong! To criticize the OP is to condone that kind of behavior. </p>
<p>As to why the liar might have told others what he did - to brag, because he was happy that he had gamed the system, because he wasn't thinking? Kids brag about cheating, kids brag about smoking weed, kids brag about sneaking out of the house at night. How is this any different? Of course, there's a tiny chance that this person is simply lying. But what kind of motive is there for him to lie? If he DIDN'T mark down African American on his application and told friends he did, he'd be CHEAPENING the merit of his admissions decision, essentially saying he had cheated when he did not. I can't see any reason why somebody would want to do this. I CAN see a reason why a liar would want to unwisely boast about what he had done, even if that requires putting himself at risk with anybody who might want to snitch.</p>
<p>^ I know what you're talking about.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Thomas J. Epenshade and Chang Y. Chung used data from the National Study of College Experience (NSCE) and determined that the following preferences are given to particular students (on a 1600 point scale):</p>
<p>African Americans: +230
Hispanics: +185
Recruited Athletes: +200
Legacies: +160
Asians: -50
[/quote]
</p>
<p>See the complete study here: <a href="http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/tje/espenshadessqptii.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/tje/espenshadessqptii.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>As to the OP and his situation, I hope that the liar gets caught eventually and expelled for what he did, or severely punished. That kind of stuff is just a disservice both to students who get in on their own merit and to students who are denied admission. Nobody's competing directly for spots, but the truth of hte matter is that Columbia can only accept a certain number of students, and for every cheater who worms his way in, somebody else is essentially losing a seat. So in an indirect way, somebody did suffer because of this guy...</p>
<p>(Thanks, roxxy, that's what I was thinking of and I could never find the source :))</p>
<p>
[quote]
If he DIDN'T mark down African American on his application and told friends he did, he'd be CHEAPENING the merit of his admissions decision, essentially saying he had cheated when he did not.
[/quote]
I hope you are implying that he is cheapening his admission just by lying about his stats not by saying that he is a URM because that would mean that you are implying that White & ORM admissions are superior to the admissions of URMs.</p>
<p>To the OP, another possibility is that your rival is South African.</p>
<p>EDIT:
Also, one problem with that whole Thomas J. Epenshade and Chang Y. Chung study is that it assumes that SAT scores are important. (The scores basically just show how well someone can do the test. If you want more information just Google it.)</p>
<p>Newjack, I meant exactly what I said. If I marked off African American on my apps, I would have an easier time getting into any university. So if the cheater pretended that he had taken advantage of affirmative action, he cheapened the merit of the admissions decision he received.</p>
<p>
[quote]
White & ORM admissions are superior to the admissions of URMs.
[/quote]
:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Thomas J. Epenshade and Chang Y. Chung used data from the National Study of College Experience (NSCE) and determined that the following preferences are given to particular students (on a 1600 point scale):</p>
<p>African Americans: +230
Hispanics: +185
Recruited Athletes: +200
Legacies: +160
Asians: -50<br>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Before you start bashing me, yes, SAT scores are not the be all and end all. But stats wise, it is easier to see that the standards are lowered for minorities. Most people would agree with me that it is easier to get into the Ivies as an African American than as an Asian American, directly because of affirmative action. So if this person had told others he marked down Af-Am when he actually did not, he would be unnecessarily cheapening down the value of his admissions. Why would anybody do that?</p>
<p>"And what about an adopted child whose exact ancestry is unknown but looks like he could be biracial?"</p>
<p>The race would be whatever race the child's parents have been putting on their school records or what is on their passport, birth certificate, driver's license, etc.</p>
<p>I know people who are white (or at least they think they are of only white ancestry) who could pass for being African American because of the texture of their hair or because of the color of their skin. Sometimes such people are Jewish or Italian.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is off topic, but I think the reference in post # 50 is being quoted out of context. That article seems to be trying to downplay the original article ( from 2004; an abstract is linked below. I can't find a free, full text version), by saying URM's aren't the only group being "recruited". The abstract seems to consider a 1500 on the (old) SAT as a "hook", just like being a URM or athlete. I always wonder if this data is still relevent.</p>
<p>An abstract of the original 2004 article.</p>
<p>Objective. This study examines how preferences for different types of applicants exercised by admission offices at elite universities influence the number and composition of admitted students.</p>
<p>Methods. Logistic regression analysis is used to link information on the admission decision for 124,374 applications to applicants' SAT scores, race, athletic ability, and legacy status, among other variables.</p>
<p>Results. Elite universities give added weight in admission decisions to applicants who have SAT scores above 1500, are African American, or are recruited athletes. A smaller, but still important, preference is shown to Hispanic students and to children of alumni. The athlete admission "advantage" has been growing, while the underrepresented minority advantage has declined.</p>
<p>Conclusions. Elite colleges and universities extend preferences to many types of students, yet affirmative action—the only preference given to underrepresented minority applicants—is the one surrounded by the most controversy.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Before you start bashing me, yes, SAT scores are not the be all and end all.
[/quote]
I am not bashing you nor will I bash you in the future. I just wanted you to clarify what you meant and make sure that your were not saying the admissons of URMs are some how inferior to the admissions of ORMs and Whites. We are cool.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Most people would agree with me that it is easier to get into the Ivies as an African American than as an Asian American
[/quote]
I know that a lot of people think this BUT people that think this assume that they would be the same person if their race were changed. They fail to realize that their whole entire life would most likely be different including their stats so it's sort of a dumb/pointless argument to make. Someone could ignorantly argue that it's easier to be a successful student if one is Asian since others would expect one to be a successful student whereas if one were African/African-American or Latino people would stereotype them as the opposite.</p>
<p>The link above
<a href="http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/tje/espenshadessqptii.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/tje/espenshadessqptii.pdf</a></p>
<p>"In an earlier article in this journal, Espenshade, Chung, and Walling
(2004) examined the strength of admission preferences for underrepresented
minority students, athletes, and alumni children at three highly selective
private research universities in the United States. Using data from the National Study of College Experience on 124,374 applications for admission
during the 1980s and the fall semesters of 1993 and 1997, they found that
elite universities give extra weight....."</p>
<p>"If I marked off African American on my apps, I would have an easier time getting into any university."</p>
<p>not if you apply to a HBCU... :p</p>
<p>I actually have the opposite problem of this thread. I'm half Cuban (and half Caucasian/Jewish), and I am totally pale. Conan O'Brien pale. My father (who was Cuban) died almost ten years ago and I had little/no contact with him or his family, so I really have no way to verify that I am actually Hispanic. That, and he has a Eastern-European last name because he was adopted. I was raised by my mother, so I have a Jewish surname. I checked off biracial for the applications that only gave you one option to select, and Hispanic->Cuban and White/Caucasian on the commonapp.</p>
<p>I'm kind of worried when I start going into interviews people are going to question whether or not I'm ********ting them and I'll have little to no way to verify my ethnicity. I was essentially home schooled, so nothing about my race on high school transcripts. There aren't exactly any IDs that specify ethnicity, either. I'm not really sure how I should handle this if someone questions me about it, because my situation would probably raise a red flag for most people when it comes to fraud.</p>
<p>Tetrishead, don't worry about it. If you're really half cuban, it doesn't matter how pale you are, you're half cuban.</p>
<p>Anyway, newjack, I don't want this thread to generate into an AA flamewar. But if it matters, I agree that people sometimes forget that if you change a person's ethnicity, their entire life changes too. So I'm behind everything you said. But the issue in this situation is that this person has the same set of stats and resume behind is back, so considering that fact, if he applies as an African American (with the exact same application), it will be easier for him to get in than if he applies as a caucasian. In the general case, I don't think it's necessarily easier for anybody to get in over anybody else, except for legacies and developmental admits, and stuff like that which you can't control.</p>