<p>yes, being asian correlates with a higher % of acceptance in most schools with regard to the % of asians in the country. However, it is not because colleges favor asians, but because asianness frequently correlates with hard work, caring more about school, parental concern, cultural emphasis on education, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I did not say that being Asian conferred "benefits in admissions," and OP did not ask that question. He asked if being Asian helped his chances in the admissions process. The answer is "yes." By virtue of being Asian, the chances that you will attend college are higher than the chances of any other race in America.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bay - methinks you are a bit confused here.</p>
<p>The OP doesn't have a higher chance of getting admitted to an elite university simply on the basis of being Asian (or half-Asian).</p>
<p>If anything, his/her chances are lowered, esp. if he/she doesn't have higher than avg. stats for admitted applicants (admitted Asian applicants at these colleges have higher avg stats than other admitted students).</p>
<p>Based purely on your premise, the OP has a far greater chance of going to community college (46% of Asian-Am students attend community college - the same % as African-Am students).</p>
<p>Once again - Asian-Am applicants have the LOWEST admit rates (and significantly lower than that of Jewish or black immigrant applicants) - so it would be tougher for the OP.</p>
<p>46% of Asian-Am students attend community college - the same % as African-Am students</p>
<p>what?! that's a lot...where do they live?</p>
<p>Oh please k&s, you certainly are aware that the astounding majority of that 46 percent is made up of nationalities that are not at all represented on this site or in selective college admissions. I'd be surprised if even 10 percent of those Asian American community college attendees were Chinese/Korean/Japanese.</p>
<p>^ Throughout the US - but w/ heavy concentrations on the West Coast, East Coast, Texas, Illinois, Minnesota, etc.</p>
<p>Along w/ the % of students attending community college, Asian-Americans have a higher poverty rate than whites - but it's hardly surprising that these misconceptions exist due to the power of the "model minority" stereotype.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Furthermore, if American universities are ultimately forced to admit only the highest stat students, resulting in college campuses composed of only one or two races, you can pretty much count on lawsuits coming down the pike alleging that those type of admissions criteria are de facto discriminatory to all other races in the U.S.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Since there hasn't been lawsuits on the basis of Ivy League colleges having a bias against gentiles (Jews make up 1.5% of the college age pop. and make up as high as 30% of the student body at IL colleges), I doubt what you proscribe would happen (or at least happen successfully).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Oh please k&s, you certainly are aware that the astounding majority of that 46 percent is made up of nationalities that are not at all represented on this site or in selective college admissions. I'd be surprised if even 10 percent of those Asian American community college attendees were Chinese/Korean/Japanese.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Please yourself Beefy.</p>
<p>When you take out Chinese, Korean, Japanese - as well as Indian, Pakistani and Fil - you pretty much are taking out the vast majority of the US Asian pop.</p>
<p>There is no way that Hmong, Cambodians, etc. have enough demographic nos. to come close to making up the majority of the 46% of Asian students attending CC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
if an Asian high school student were to ask me if being Asian helps his chances in admission to Duke, then I would respond (as I have done), that Asians have the highest chance of being admitted to Duke of any race in America.
[/quote]
A student is not an racial group. This is a basic concept that you must understand before answering anyone who asks that type of question. What your answer says is that a certain racial group is statistically more likely to succeed in admissions. It says nothing about an individual's chances at all.</p>
<p>Thats Beef*s* to you Mme.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Along w/ the % of students attending community college, Asian-Americans have a higher poverty rate than whites - but it's hardly surprising that these misconceptions exist due to the power of the "model minority" stereotype.
[/quote]
just want to point out, though, that Asians are also by far the wealthiest of all the ethnic groups in the US.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Since there hasn't been lawsuits on the basis of Ivy League colleges having a bias against gentiles (Jews make up 1.5% of the college age pop. and make up as high as 30% of the student body at IL colleges), I doubt what you proscribe would happen (or at least happen successfully).
[/quote]
this is irrelevant, since "Jew" is not an ethnicity. racial/ethnic diversity is a legitimate goal but i doubt religious diversity is one.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Please yourself Beefy.</p>
<p>When you take out Chinese, Korean, Japanese - as well as Indian, Pakistani and Fil - you pretty much are taking out the vast majority of the US Asian pop.
There is no way that Hmong, Cambodians, etc. have enough demographic nos. to come close to making up the majority of the 46% of Asian students attending CC.
[/quote]
i don't understand your logic. in order to make that claim that "There is no way that Hmong, Cambodians, etc. have enough demographic nos. to come close to making up the majority of the 46% of Asian students attending CC" you need to know the actual number of Asian students attending community colleges.</p>
<p>"Jew" is an ethnicity. Its status as a religion and ethnicity are not mutually exclusive after all. Just think of the number of times you've heard people say they're half Jewish... you don't hear people say they're half Hindu or half Christian do you?</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Jew" is an ethnicity. Its status as a religion and ethnicity are not mutually exclusive after all. Just think of the number of times you've heard people say they're half Jewish... you don't hear people say they're half Hindu or half Christian do you?
[/quote]
uhhh... i'm pretty sure that "Jew" is not an ethnicity. also, you can't really compare being Hindu or Christian to being Jewish, since Judaism has a pretty unique belief system where racial identity is not as important as religious identity.</p>
<p>^yes it is. </p>
<p>If your mother is jewish then you are jewish. Thats why hitler tried to exterminate the jewish RACE. And why jews share a lot of common features.</p>
<p>come on guys... i have spent a lot of time learning about major world religions. (i go to a religious where juniors are required to take a year long course world religions course.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
If your mother is jewish then you are jewish.
[/quote]
that's because of their religious tradition.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Thats why hitler tried to exterminate the jewish RACE. And why jews share a lot of common features.
[/quote]
i don't think Hitler was any kind of expert on anthropology... regardless, if "Jew" is an ethnicity or racial group, from what group are they biological descedents of? i hope you don't think that Ethiopian Jews and Chinese Jews belong to the same ethnic group of "Jew." </p>
<p>also, why isn't there a checkbox labeled "Jew" on college applications even though Jews make up a rather significant amount of college applicants/students? also, check out the latest Census. why isn't there a "Jewish" ethnicity category?</p>
<p>wow, we are so off topic now... :P</p>
<p>
[quote]
that's not fair of you say. there is no person in this world who does not have to overcome something. in regards to under-represented minorities, they have to overcome stereotypes about their intelligence and values.</p>
<p>also, don't use that SAT vs. Race argument. it's a bad point. the whole premise behind that argument is that the SAT is the most important factor in regards to college admissions, which i think everyone on here knows is not true.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I wrote that Asian applicants had to disprove (c.f. overcome) stereotypes in the admissions process. As backing for my statement, please refer to this</a> article.</p>
<p>Do "under-represented" minorities have to disprove stereotypes? Sure. Do they have to do it in the admissions process? I don't think so. Admissions officers fear asking whether an applicant is "too black" or "too Hispanic," but too many officers have no qualms asking if an applicant is "too Asian."</p>
<p>Before you advise me to not use "that SAT vs. Race argument," I think you should know what it is. In 2005, Espenshade and Chung wrote a paper, "The Opportunity Cost of Admission Preferences at Elite Universities." They found that being Asian was worth the equivalent of a 50 point deduction on the applicant's SAT score. To date, Espenshade and Chung's paper has not been properly refuted (*) and indeed, an earlier and separate paper published in 2004 based on the same topic was supported by later research from Alon and Tienda.</p>
<p>(*)</p>
<p>Kidder's paper is interesting in its own right but is a poor answer to Espenshade and Chung. Espenshade et al. used data from undergraduates. Kidder used data from law school students. He compared apples to oranges. He was disingenuous because he knew that if he were to use undergraduate data, he could not refute Espenshade et al.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Furthermore, if American universities are ultimately forced to admit only the highest stat students, resulting in college campuses composed of only one or two races, you can pretty much count on lawsuits coming down the pike alleging that those type of admissions criteria are de facto discriminatory to all other races in the U.S.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Once again, who's arguing that universities should be forced to admit only the highest stat students? This is the straw man that never gets put out. For whatever reason, it is next to impossible for supporters of racial preferences to comprehend that race-blind admissions need not be "highest stats only."</p>
<p>It is so ironic that the same people who tell you that race isn't that big of a factor are the same ones who tell you that the removal of race results in the removal of the essay, extracurriculars, recommendations, and so forth. I mean, if admissions is "highest stats only," then there's no room for any of those additional factors I have just listed.</p>
<p>Race-blind means race is not considered. It is not synonymous with "highest stats only."</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do they have to do it in the admissions process? I don't think so.
[/quote]
kids who are "too black" or "too hispanic" don't even apply to college...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Before you advise me to not use "that SAT vs. Race argument," I think you should know what it is. In 2005, Espenshade and Chung wrote a paper, "The Opportunity Cost of Admission Preferences at Elite Universities." They found that being Asian was worth the equivalent of a 50 point deduction on the applicant's SAT score. To date, Espenshade and Chung's paper has not been properly refuted (*) and indeed, an earlier and separate paper published in 2004 based on the same topic was supported by later research from Alon and Tienda.
[/quote]
i have seen that study referenced way too many times on this forum; i'm pretty familiar with it. anyways, how can you dispute the fact that the "50pt deduction" significantly impacts colleges' admissions decision? the only way to make that argument is to assume that SAT scores are the most important component of an application, which just is not true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Race-blind means race is not considered. It is not synonymous with "highest stats only."
[/quote]
well, what is your argument for not considering race?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Race-blind means race is not considered. It is not synonymous with "highest stats only."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Race-blind admissions does not consider inequity at the primary or secondary level or the historic and current discrimination faced by URM. To deny a part of someone' ethnicity is to make them less than those who currently are in power. Race-blind is an illusion because only those that have power can set up or define what the status quo is. </p>
<p>Thus, race-blind would favor those that have traditionally had the power, while those that do not have much power fight amongst themselves for it--Balkanizing society further.</p>
<p>But one's ethnicity does not necessarily equate with inequity at the primary or secondary education levels. Why should a Caucasian, Asian, Hispanic, or Black from the same high school face different college admission standards? I see no reason why an economic form of affirmative action wouldn't address inequity better than racial affirmative action.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Once again, who's arguing that universities should be forced to admit only the highest stat students? This is the straw man that never gets put out. For whatever reason, it is next to impossible for supporters of racial preferences to comprehend that race-blind admissions need not be "highest stats only."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It never gets put out because the majority often uses stats and grades as the prima faci reason that an applicant should get into a college. That is because opponents to racial consideration in admissions uses that as a bar that separates the deserving from those that are not (ignoring historical as well as current discrimination based on the belief that white privilege has somehow been irradiated and that every person is equal in the eyes of society and the status quo). Non-URMs, by virtue of belonging to the group in power, has had more resources and political clout than URMs--rural and low-income whites excluded. The only benefits rural and low-income whites have is the fact that they look like those in power--reducing their oppression by the non-URMs that have enjoy it. It is not surprising that there would be in-fighting between rural and low-income white and URMs because both have suffered marginalization. Again, out groups fight amongst themselves for power.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I see no reason why an economic form of affirmative action wouldn't address inequity better than racial affirmative action.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Economic AA would better serve non-URM candidates, but not serve to reduce racism or prejudice by the majority towards URMs. So better is a bit relative. </p>
<p>It's because economic considerations do not change outward appearances, nor do they combat discrimination by the status quo--at least for some URMs. Thus, a low-income non-URM would be helped by socioeconomic considerations, minimizing stigmatization by those in power and enabling them to blend somewhat into the majority. URMs, because they sometimes do not look like the majority, would still face some marginalization by the status quo.</p>
<p>Thus, economic considerations better enable those that outwardly look like the majority, while leaving URMs to battle racist attitude on their own--though, thankfully, there are non-URMs who have stood up to speak out against rascism and understand how prejudice is also affected by appearances. It is similar to overweight individuals being judged and treated differently than someone who fits the mold society has set for appearances. Or, how women are sometimes treated by men in today's society.</p>