<p>
</p>
<p>Feel free to explain why my reply to your claim, “But many URMs have been given a chance at social mobility because of affirmative action,” employed historical fallacies.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Silly you! </p>
<p>Fabrizio, you are spinning this in a hopeless mess. OHMom was asking about the pre1997 and post 1997 period. She found a spreadsheet with years that ended in 2010. But, again, ler HER coming back and tell you what she cared to see. My money is that she would prefer to see 1994 to 2014 for a complete overview. </p>
<p>But here is better area to apply your skills rather than emulating Clinton in defining the term WILL. In your opinion, why is it that the admit rate of Asians has shrunk in the past years and that for the LAST three years there are FEWER Asian admits? In theory, a growing application pool should result in larger numbers … A point repeated here but nonetheless inaccurate for Asians at Cal. </p>
<p>Since you are so determined to answer OHM question so religiously, why not do it with an updated question based on the recent past? </p>
<p>They are not mutually exclusive. A person can have white race with hispanic ethnicity or be AA/black with hispanic ethnicity. </p>
<p>Just select as many as apply to you. Its not a thing you can change :)</p>
<p>there are no two identical students who differ only in skin color/race/ethnicity. there are always differences in applicants, and each school will have its different needs.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s possible to make such generalizations.</p>
<p>For college admissions/scholarships, is it better to be African American or Hispanic? Which ethnicity is more likely to be accepted when two applicants have the same stats?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. Her question was based on data from 1994 to 2010. Thus, an answer to her question should use the same data. I did that; you did not.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was referring to the period 1994 to 2010. That’s all in the past, but starting from 1994, any subsequent year is in the future relative to 1994. Hence, it is not inappropriate to use “will.” Moreover, if you wish to be this literal, you are claiming that I made a “predictive statement.” Yet, you start from 2010. Since 2011, 2012, and 2013 have already come and gone, how could I predict what has already happened?</p>
<p>xiggi, it is absolutely pathetic of you to cherry pick certain years from 1994 to 2010 instead of considering the period as a whole or even 1998 to 2010 as a whole.</p>
<p>So much for reading comprehension, Fabrizio. Impressive how you continue to spin instead of addressing the question. </p>
<p>Is it to hard or challenging to give YOUR explanation as to why the rate of admissions in the period 1994 to 2014 dropped in the last three years after remaining in a narrow range? And explain why the number. Of admits has dropped from 2010 to 2014. </p>
<p>You can stop discussing your use of “will” and buy the argument of a poor command of grammar. </p>
<p>No answer to my question as to how I could have predicted what has already happened. Why am I not surprised? This was really a bad fight to pick, xiggi.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ah, even xiggi can’t hide from the truth forever. Thanks for finally admitting that yes, from 1994 to 2010, the variance of the admit rate of Asians was the lowest among all “defined” racial classifications. As for your question, I don’t know. I’d have to compare it to the admit rate of other racial classifications in those years. I don’t know where you got the information after 2010. It isn’t [here[/url</a>], and it isn’t [url=<a href=“http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2014/fall-2014-admissions-table3.pdf]here”>http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2014/fall-2014-admissions-table3.pdf]here</a> either](<a href=“Institutional Research and Academic Planning | UCOP”>Institutional Research and Academic Planning | UCOP).</p>
<p>You have to use the second link you posted and look for the two files on admissions and applications by campus and ethnicity. This is the second one.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2014/fall-2014-applications-table3.2.pdf”>http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2014/fall-2014-applications-table3.2.pdf</a></p>
<p>Calculate the ratios. </p>
<p>After having compared the admit rates for “African Americans, Chicanos / Latinos, and Whites” in addition to “Asian Americans” from 2011 to 2014, it’s apparent that such declines basically occurred across the board.</p>
<p>Blacks
**15.4<a href=“2010”>/b</a>
15.4
13.5
13.03
11.4</p>
<p>Asian
**28.1<a href=“2010”>/b</a>
26.78
26.21
25.26
21.09</p>
<p>Hispanic
**18.9<a href=“2010”>/b</a>
17.42
16.49
14.69
14.98</p>
<p>White
**28.4<a href=“2010”>/b</a>
25.46
24.57
23.27
24.28</p>
<p>Why did the rates decline for everyone? Weren’t these years the among the “most competitive” ever for all top schools?</p>
<p>The devil is in the details. Do you think it was across the board from 2013 to 2014 for Asians, Latinos, and Whites? </p>
<p>It will be interesting to see if the downward trend in the admission of Asians at Berkeley persists next year, and if in 2015, the highest admit rate will continue to be for Whites, as Cal continues to try to move away from a strict local school to a regional and to a school that attracts domestic students well beyond California. Ultimately, if Cal transforms itself into a national powerhouse, so will its racial diversity that now mostly reflects California’s. </p>
<p>There are no parallels with other large research universities. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you still cherry picking?</p>
<p>Gee, what is that phobia about cherrypicking! Show some objectivity. Anyhow, I hope you -and the ones who follow your posts- learned where to find the correct data to analyze the patterns of admissions at the UC. The next step, in time, will be to correctly analyze the trends and stop reaching false conclusions. </p>
<p>I’ll catch up in 2-3 years when more numbers will surface and the trends of THIS decade be clearer. I know you will still be here directing the traffic in that very small corner of CC. Until then! </p>
<p>PS And here is a parting gift. The possible continuation of Cal to a broader recruiting base will not directly affect the numbers we have been looking at. The statistics I posted or linked to are for California freshmen students only. The overall racial distribution will probably change to a larger degree, but not the tables that show the ethnicity by campus since they have a different scope and content. </p>
<p>Oh, please, don’t talk about “objectivity” and “correctly analyzing trends” when all you do is selectively pick years that fit your story. You must have no sense of shame whatsoever.</p>
<p>the general trend of this thread:</p>
<p>xiggi: here are 2 years that prove I’m right, but I’m done so I’ll see you in 2-3 years you idiot
fabrizio: ur mum
xiggi: MY MUM WAS AROUND IN 2014 AND 2009 AND 2008 WHICH SIMULTANEOUSLY PROVE THAT I AM RIGHT AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS WRONG
other poster: can I join
xiggi and fabrizio: lol no</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is correct. The spreadsheet with those years was the only one I could find that began before '97 (the “before '97” was what I hadn’t been able to find in the discussion prior to that) . IMO, the more years to compare the better, I’d like to see 1980 to 2014 if I could.</p>
<p>I’d be interested to see Florida and Michigan pre and post AA. </p>
<p>So, we went to the Cal booth at a college fair. The parents in the mob were positively manic about telling the reps how great their kids were. I finally got to the front, and asked if my S should even bother applying with less than a 2200. The rep looked annoyed and said, “Well, maybe, if he has strong EC’s. like starting a Robotics Club or something.”
LOL.
Anyway, my question is: Will it help or hurt to mark “White male” on applications? Or should my S decline to state? Thank you.</p>
<p>That’s surprising since according to the CDS for Cal the 25/75 is 1870 to 2240. If your child had a 2200 he would be well above the mean. </p>
<p>Common perceptions that elite colleges have of Asian and Indian American applicants:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Asians are notorious for being pre-professionally oriented, often majoring in premed(bio/humbio)/engineering/business and blowing off liberal arts.</p></li>
<li><p>Asians tend to have a homogeneous set of extra-curricular interests, such as the stereotypically Asian EC’s like tennis/violin/math team. Unfortunately, Harvard isn’t going to want 400 Asian premeds/engineers who excel at piano/tennis/math in its freshman class of 1,600; they are “building a class,” and 400 Asian premeds/engineers are not on the list of goals.</p></li>
<li><p>Many elite colleges view Asians as being grade-grubbers who value grades over learning, leading to comments from admissions officers such as “they [Asian students] don’t provide the kind of intellectual environment that Jewish students provide.”</p></li>
<li><p>Ivy League schools give applicants two scores: an academic score and a personal score reflecting qualities such as independent thought and passion. The byproduct of a fairly homogeneous immigrant Asian culture with strict parenting that values education and honoring a family’s sacrifice is that it tends not to allow for as much freedom to become independent thinkers. Unfortunately, Asians tend to rate low on the personal score, and surprisingly, on the academic score as well for reasons I’ll touch on below.</p></li>
<li><p>Asians are viewed as quiet, diligent students who don’t rock the boat. Unfortunately, this is not what elite colleges are looking for, and far too many recommendation letters reinforce this stereotype.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Man I really hope what’s written in the previous post is untrue in regards to what ad cons think during the admission process. I understand that there is a categorical approach to the admissions process, but no race or culture can be singularly defined or should be defined in such a manner. Interestingly enough at Harvard last year the percentage of freshman athletes who were Asian or black was exactly the same. 13%. </p>