<p>Wow, you are pretty obtuse. 4,903 is almost nothing. I already told you: divide 4903 by 50, and you get less than 98. Since 50 is a low end estimate of the number of selective schools, the situation gets worse if you want to broaden the list to 100 schools. No elite university would ever be satisfied with just 98 black and Hispanic freshmen (much less 49!) The only way to get more is to admit students with lower SAT scores. That’s racial preferences.</p>
<p>By contrast, elites can easily fill their classes with high-scoring Asians. Dividing 17332 by 50 gets you more than 346. Even half of that at 173 is still enough. While the nature of this topic forces me to constantly disclaim that the SAT is not everything, nor should it be, it remains that elites do not have to admit lower scoring Asians to have “enough” of them. They do for blacks and Hispanics.</p>
<p>These are just the facts. At this point, it is clear that you are desperate to cling on to your fantasy that there is no gap in achievement at the high end of the distribution by racial classification. It’s not clear to me why you refuse to accept the reality that there is a gap, and a large one at that. Is it because you would feel inferior if you accepted the truth? Why? The distribution is the distribution; it says nothing about racial superiority / inferiority. As tokenadult as said, all it takes to do well on a standardized test is to bubble in the right answer, which all individuals, regardless of racial classification, are able to do.</p>
<p>^Deception refers to all the pretenders. Those who begin memorizing SAT test questions in the 8th grade, not really knowing the concept but recognizing the answer, betting that SAT will recycle test questions. Fraud refers more to international candidates. Fraud domestically, I would assume is about the same for all races.</p>
<p>Who considers the top 50 schools elite? T-20 at the most is Elite, and I’d argue that it’s really T-10 or less. 4903 is plenty for the T-20 schools and certainly way more than enough for the top 10. Thanks for proving it. You must be getting low on toes.</p>
<p>Let’s add statistics to the areas in which you are lacking. The high end of the curve always has a very small distribution. Good Grief, open a book!</p>
<p>Oh, the delicious irony of it all. First, I said top 25 research universities and top 25 LACs. Are you trying to say that you do not consider any LAC to be elite?</p>
<p>Second, for someone who derisively assumes that Asians are “conceited” and “obsessed with the elites,” it’s hilarious that you think ten schools at most qualify as elite. Ironically, by saying that, you fit into your side’s stereotype of Asians. I guess what they say is right: familiarity breeds contempt.</p>
<p>This statement makes no sense. Are you saying there’s not a LAC in the T20? You haven’t pulled the trigger, yet. But I sense that your about to lose another toe.</p>
<p>Your assumption is that the 90th percentile, for example, is the same across racial classifications. It is not. Factually, you are wrong here, which is why the only thing you can do is say things like “there’s no way I’m wrong because [insert fallacy here].”</p>
<p>The 90th percentile for Asians, for example, is roughly speaking 700 per section. But the corresponding score for Hispanics is somewhere between 550 and 600, at least 100 points less. (The case is the same for blacks.)</p>
<p>We can go up to the 95th percentile, since you have a tendency to dodge facts and shift the goalposts. For blacks, the 95th percentile is roughly speaking 600 per section. For Hispanics, it’s somewhere between 600 and 650. For Asians, it’s somewhere between 700 and 750, again at least 100 points greater.</p>
<p>Factually, you are simply wrong. All you can do is desperately wave your hands and pretend that “there’s no way [you] can be wrong because [insert fallacy here].” You do this because you find the truth - there is a HUGE gap at the top - to be too painful to accept.</p>
<p>But why are you so adamant against accepting it? Look at perazziman. He accepts that there’s a huge gap, and he thinks it exists partially (or substantially) because of tracking. You deny that it exists because you think to accept the truth is to acknowledge some sort of racial inferiority, which is simply not true.</p>
<p>Have you even looked at any rankings before? USNWR never groups research universities and LACs together, so “T20” is meaningless unless you specify where the schools are coming from.</p>
<p>Let’s get at the central issue here. Why are you so intent on denying that there is a huge gap at the top? The percentiles by racial classification are not equal; the 90th percentile for Asians is the 99th percentile for blacks and Hispanics. There are more than three times as many 2100+/2400 scoring Asians than blacks and Hispanics, even though blacks and Hispanics outnumber Asians in the entire pool by more than double.</p>
<p>None of this means that Asians are superior or blacks / Hispanics are inferior. Absolutely not. But the gaps exist, and they are huge. You aren’t doing yourself any favors by pretending that they don’t exist and arrogantly claiming that you “can’t be wrong” because there are “so many black and Hispanics taking the SAT.”</p>
<p>Honestly, I don’t even get a kick out of this because you’ve so painfully deluded yourself into thinking that your narrative fits the facts. It doesn’t. All you can do is wave your hands and keep shifting the goalposts.</p>
<p>If not, no problem. I didn’t go to Harvard, and I don’t care if you insult the institution, but if you want to claim that Harvard isn’t elite, then…um…thanks for voluntarily destroying your credibility to nothing.</p>
<p>The SAT is dead so stop hanging on to a corpse. Again your mistake is not looking at the overall large number of the population and only looking at scores. BTW as argued before there is over 4000 Black and Hispanic candidates that have a SAT of 700 or more per section. How many do you need before you will acknowledge that there is plenty of top notch minority candidates!</p>
<p>Ridiculous. Why would you assume to exclude HYPSM off the elite list? Logic can only dictate using the National University list. Apparently, you’re again trying to confuse the argument, probably because of desperation.</p>
<p>Nice try at changing the argument. Have you given up on the original argument Elite V. T2,3 re: AA? I suggest you do. </p>
<p>Most people allege discrimination because they stubbornly hang on to SAT scoring, refusing to acknowledge that it’s dying and unreliable, and more importantly failing to realize that many other factors are involved other than the SAT.</p>
<p>Of course it’s not true. My opinion is and will always be that the whole candidate must be evaluated and if that means a 2100 SAT get selected over a 2300 SAT, it’s because of other reason besides SAT or Skin color. </p>
<p>Why can’t you believe that your perfect students are failing in other areas like EC’s, Recommendations & Essays? Why do you resort to blaming it on race. Here let me give you a reason. It’s easier to blame a system as being unfair than to admit that your not good enough. How many out there are puffing up stats and blaming it on prejudice instead of just admitting that they weren’t good enough.</p>
<p>Please, stop being delusional. I have pointed out to you repeatedly that even though twice as many black and Hispanic college-bound seniors take the SAT compared to Asians, there are more than three times as many Asians who score 2100+/2400 on the SAT compared to blacks and Hispanics. Yet, you still wish to pretend that there is no gap at the high end because the “overall large number of the population” means “there’s no way [you] can be wrong.”</p>
<p>Again, you’re assuming that the percentiles are the same across racial classifications. If true, that would imply that if twice as many blacks and Hispanics take the SAT compared to Asians, there should be twice as many blacks and Hispanics scoring 2100+/2400 compared to Asians. But that is not the case. Far from it. You cannot dispute this. All you can do is ignore it, wave your hands, and scream “I can’t be wrong! I can’t be wrong! Large numbers mean I have to be right!”</p>
<p>I do not understand why you are so intent on insisting that there is no gap at the top when I have thrown the numbers at your face repeatedly proving you wrong. Is it because you believe that accepting the truth is tantamount to an admission of racial inferiority? Nonsense. The gaps say nothing about racial superiority or inferiority. It’s really sad to see you so determined to cling on to your fable that the gap is nonexistent at the top but a huge problem in the middle.</p>
<p>4,903 is nothing compared to the number of selective institutions in this country that seek “diversity.” It’s not just “less than ten” schools that want the appearance of “diversity”; it’s at least 50, both research universities and LACs. And when you divide 4,903 by 50, you get a number less than 98. No selective institution would ever be content with less than 98 incoming black and Hispanic freshmen. To get more, they have to admit lower-scoring blacks and Hispanics. That’s racial preferences in action.</p>
<p>By contrast, there’s no need to do that for Asians. With 17,732 Asians scoring 2100+/2400, fifty elites can easily have “enough” Asians in their incoming classes. If there were that many black and Hispanic high scorers, indeed, there would be no need for racial preferences. But there aren’t that many. There are 4,903, which is not even one third of 17,732.</p>
<p>Then explain why 700 per section is the 90th percentile for Asians but the 99th percentile for blacks and Hispanics. I’m going to keep asking you this until you admit that there’s a gap. You can try to wave your hands as furiously as you like, and you keep screaming “I can’t be wrong! I can’t be wrong!” until the proverbial cows come home. But it remains that in 2012, 700 per section was the 90th percentile for Asians but the 99th percentile for blacks and Hispanics, so tell me why 700 per section wasn’t the same percentile for Asians and blacks/Hispanics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First, I never said Asian applicants are perfect. This is more of your prejudice coming out, and that’s all you have shown in your posts: prejudice, arrogance, and fallacies.</p>
<p>Second, there’s no evidence for your claim, and what little evidence we have on how Asians are rated in the subjective areas (two years at Duke) shows that Asians are rated higher than blacks and Hispanics on all three of those subjective criteria.</p>
<p>Hilarious. First, you claim that there are LACs in the “T20.” Then, you claim that “T20” refers to research universities. Are you a (rising) sophomore in high school or just a severely misguided and misinformed parent?</p>
<p>Okay, you have failed to grasp sociology, economics, statistics, civics and on and on. Let’s try Physics. THERE CAN’T BE A GAP WHERE THERE IS NO ROOM. AT THE VERY TOP EVERYONE IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME! Let go of the SAT. It is only one piece of the puzzle. </p>
<p>I challenge you to quote where I said there is a huge problem in the middle. THOSE ARE YOUR WORDS and your desperation to win a losing battle.</p>
<p>1)Until you extrapolate International Asians scores, you really need to slow your roll. A big percentage of the top scores are likely coming from overseas.</p>
<p>2)The big failing in your logic is the failure to understand that the seats at the elite schools are very limited. After a certain point it doesn’t matter how well a group does. Do you not understand that 100% of Asians could score over a 2100 SAT and very little would change at the elite schools. This is because of a lack of capacity and the abundance of students from all races with a 2100+. </p>
<p>NO MATTTER HOW MUCH WATER RUNS OUT OF THE FACET. THE GLASS WILL ONLY HOLD SO MUCH.</p>
<p>More nonsense on your part and as mentioned before when you resort to it I will take you to task. THE LAC thing was your attempt to muddy the water. It was not my assertion. I stuck with National Universities list just to keep you on course long enough for you to shoot off another toe. Bang there goes another toe.</p>
<p>Okay let’s try it this way. The top 4000 Black and Hispanic students flood Harvard with applications. 500 students are accepted. 4500 are rejected even though at least 500 of the rejected had arguably as good or better stats than students accepted from other races. Are Blacks and Hispanics suffering from discrimination?</p>
<p>Then explain why the 90th percentile for Asians is the 99th percentile for blacks and Hispanics. Stop waving your hands and screaming “I can’t be wrong!” Tell me why the 90th percentile for Asians is the 99th percentile for blacks and Hispanics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are the one claiming that racial preferences are more prevalent (indeed, most prevalent) at “T2/T3 state schools” relative to elites (i.e. “less than ten schools”) because “there are so many T2/T3 state schools, I can’t be wrong!” (fallacy, non-sequitur). But again, if there are no gaps, there is no need for racial preferences.</p>
<p>If you think T2/T3 state schools have to practice racial preferences, then you’re saying that there are gaps in the middle. There aren’t enough blacks and Hispanics scoring, say, 1500/2400 to 1650/2400, so T2/T3 state schools have to “waive SAT/GPA requirements” for them (your words). If there were no gap, then why would the schools have to waive requirements for students who met them?</p>
<p>You are not even able to think about the implications of your farcical argument. And I’m not letting you off the hook. If you keep denying that there’s a gap at the top, I’m going to keep asking you why the 90th percentile for Asians is the 99th percentile for blacks and Hispanics.</p>