<p>Is it true that Ivies have different SAT requirements for different races? My friend told me Asians have to get a 2300 while African Americans have to get 2100. Is this true??? If so, can you show me some kind of proof??</p>
<p>Oh brother… why don’t you read the first stickied thread on this page?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2012/02/_lets_be_frank_about_anti_asian_admission_policies.html”>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2012/02/_lets_be_frank_about_anti_asian_admission_policies.html</a></p>
<p>There’s not going to be any type of hard definitive proof. Only statistics and speculation. No university is going to openly admit that they have these requirements.</p>
<p>To be fair, admissions panels are supposed to apply standards fairly to everyone who applies. However, people on admissions panels are human just like you, me, or anyone else. And as such, they’re subject to common human fallacies. Specifically prejudice. It’s unfortunate, but it can and does happen:</p>
<p><a href=“My first week of work | feministconservative”>https://feministconservative.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2012/06/08/my-first-week-of-work/</a></p>
<p>So some admissions officers might see some particular Asian applicant is below what they’re used to seeing from Asians. Unfortunately, there’s no way you or anyone else would know, but that Asian applicant could be subject to the prejudices of the admissions panel. It’s really all just a game of luck when it comes to admissions. How well can you dazzle people on paper?</p>
<p>@cameraphone
I thought it was a legal aspect of affirmative action along with making more money for the college through certai processes.</p>
<p>They somewhat address this in A is for Admissions by Michelle Hernandez. It’s a great read.</p>
<p>The Harvard Crimson surveyed 800 of the kids entering the class of 2017 last year. The found that the average SAT score for Asians was a 2320, Whites 2220, Hispanics 2130, Blacks 2110.</p>
<p>Guys, there’s racism in the college admissions process everywhere. And the worst of it is the colleges say their application review is holistic. One word: BS.</p>
<p>If there was no affirmative action policy in place, a lot less minorities would be in these top institutions. Some people find their advantage in the college system unfair, but their race offers something that universities need. The one thing that does irk me is when a person blames a minority for taking their place at a college even though they would have still be rejected if affirmative action was not in place. People may see the system as racist but you really can’t call it that when asians are still more represented in colleges than other universities. Do not blame minorities for taking spots, blame your peers for achieving such wonderful accomplishments that force you to compete at a higher level.</p>
<p>@bozllie: It’s not that simplistic. Sophisticated college admissions don’t just expect more SAT points from certain sub groups and fewer from others. They practice what’s called “category admissions” which is explained in the bottom third of this essay:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.reed.edu/apply/news_and_articles/admission_messages.html”>http://www.reed.edu/apply/news_and_articles/admission_messages.html</a></p>
<p>The fact is colleges want a certain mix of students. Internationals, women, minorities, science majors, musicians, theater people, athletes, celebrities, etc. And they will allocate soft quotas to try to meet those goals. The kid who is offered a scholarship to play volleyball doesn’t take away the spot of the science major applicant from Los Angeles – that slot was never open in the first place. The LA kid, who doesn’t fall into one of the sub categories competes with others in the “general” category. And it can work out where some sub categories’ average SATs/ACTs are higher or lower than others.</p>
<p>Would you expect the avg SATs of hockey players admitted to Harvard to be lower than the “unhooked” applicants’ pool? If you don’t, then you’re naive.</p>
<p>But that last hockey player that gets admitted – who does he keep out? The hockey player with lesser grades/SATs and potential. The black kid who gets admitted pushes out another black kid with lesser grades/SATs and potential. The Asian pianist never was in competition for the hockey player’s spot nor the slot allocated to a black student. (and YES, I’m speaking about unofficial quotas gasp!)</p>
<p>You know who ALWAYS gets the short end of the stick? International applicants (who aren’t billionaire pricelings, that is) at all top US colleges. They have, in general, better SATs than the avg white/Asian American. But they face the stiffest odds. Why? Because the college has allocated that sub-group a fixed no. of seats and they battle it out for those golden tickets. </p>
<p>Where’s the outcry for their “injustice”? Have you ever seen an editorial saying: “Top Korean or Indian students deserve to get into Ivy A or big name tech college B but Americans with lesser scores are keeping them out! We demand this unfairness end now!” Nope. You hear crickets.</p>
<p>Not such a linear argument, is it?</p>
<p>This has often been bandied about. Here’s one:
<a href=“Does URM boost an application? - #4 by T26E4 - Applying to College - College Confidential Forums”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/16674187</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What you are claiming is that colleges use racial quotas (in addition to quotas for hockey players and the like) in admissions, which colleges tend to strenuously deny, even if they do consider race and ethnicity in admissions.</p>
<p>That is exactly what I’m suggesting. All one has to do is look at the historical percentages of sub groups. They tend to hover near certain percentages each year. “soft quotas” is how it’s explained away. </p>
<p>Explicit university racial quotas are illegal, period, as per SCOTUS decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. That doesn’t mean schools don’t weasel around to the get the dubiously coincidentally identical racial percentages, year after year after year.</p>
<p>@colllegeamateur, if you don’t like the holistic approach elite colleges take, there are many schools that only take into account GPA and test scores, rack em and stack em. When you grow up and become a president or a trustee of an elite college, you can try to impliment your views. For now, have fun at your sttate school.</p>
<p>^Exactly</p>
<p>@colllegeamateur About 85% of US colleges solely admit on the features your no “BS” policy: “deservedness” based on metrics of GPA and tests. (Many European and Asian colleges practice this as well.) In your calculus, high scoring non URMs can and do get into these US schools in droves if they got rid of the “BS”</p>
<p>But guess what? I posit that among the ingredients that make these schools so highly regarded is a mixture of many things. Super resources in facilities, faculty – stemming from huge endowments. Great tradition and reputation. Fantastic alumni groups and support.</p>
<p>Oh, and let’s not forget the students themselves right? It’s they who people the community service projects, work in the research labs, write the plays and lyrics and sports columns, carve and paint the art pieces, have the late night bull sessions about everything under the sun. And how are these marvelous collections of students generated? By generating an excel spreadsheet and picking the top 1200 or 1500 scoring applicants? No friggen way.</p>
<p>This body is incredible in large part due to the methods and admissions strategies of the schools themselves. This means bringing in scholar athletes, super musicians, super scientists, great student leaders, actors, singers, outstanding examples of overcoming unusual circumstances, people from across the globe – and yes, even the occasional marginal child/grandchild of a wealthy super-donor. And some of these people will have brown skin too.</p>
<p>People seem to think you have your cake and eat it too. They would demand that these colleges – turn into the other 85%. But here’s the rub. It’s these 15% that are the ones that mostly populate the (take your pick) so-called Best Colleges lists.</p>
<p>If people want to go to a school that doesn’t give preferences to athletes and legacies – go ahead. Plenty to choose from. </p>
<p>I tell you, if the Ivies I applied to were 50% wealthy white and 45% Asian, I wouldn’t have wanted to attend them. And they wouldn’t be very “prestigious” either. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why would they be less prestigious? Because you think Asians are low class?</p>
<p>
The reason they’ll never admit this is because it is almost certainly illegal (even at private colleges). Blakke (<a href=“Regents of the University of California v. Bakke - Wikipedia”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_of_the_University_of_California_v._Bakke</a>) forbid the use of strict quotas as far back as 1978.</p>
<p>FWIW, I think the comparison (racial quotas vs. hockey player quotas, e.g.), while not incorrect, misses a key distinction: many if not most people find categorizing and grouping people by race to be fundamentally repugnant. </p>
<p>I’m reasonably sure that T26E4 holds no anti-Asian bias. :)>- </p>
<p>Hey GMT: To confirm what Sherpa said, I’m Chinese myself but grew up in a very diverse community, ethnically and economically. In my opinion, I am glad I attended a school that valued bringing together a wide swath of students.</p>
<p>Hi Sherpa, I. Am so envious of your low humidity. Sucks here.</p>