"Race" in College Admission FAQ & Discussion 6

Applying to College
341

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree, to a point. Asians are successful because they appear more likely to put in the right effort. And, I’ll be the first person here to say there’s a segment of the “black community” pushing the opposite outcome. However, I strongly disagree that all obstacles can be overcome by hard work. This is not a meritocracy. Now, in terms of race, yes, it doesn’t matter - it’s about putting in the right effort. Racism certainly still exists, but is far less an issue now than it once was, and it less an issue than other problems. For example, I’m an advocate for the use of socioeconomic status in the admissions process. An upper-income student and a low-income student could put in the same amount of hard work, but the result simply isn’t going to be the same. It’s a class mobility issue; I don’t feel that it could be solved through merely hard work.</p>

<p>The jealousy you’re talking about is an entitlement issue as well. There’s a huge entitlement problem in this country, especially on this board in response to top schools. I remember reading an article on THE CHOICE (NYT) about a boy who was rejected from Columbia ED. A girl from that same school, a Hispanic girl, was accepted. The parent seemed to think that that girl was a spoiled, underachieving materialistic brat. So naturally, the parent was mad that her son got rejected and this girl took “his spot” because that girl was a minority admit. Never once did the parent consider that HER SON wasn’t unique or qualified. In fact, the parent was proud of her son’s 1990 SAT - and seemed to think that was Columbia quality alone. Not to mention, the parent knew nothing of the Hispanic girl - she could have been an underachieving brat, but the mother had no idea what the student was like. She probably didn’t know the students rank, let alone SAT score - not to mention other application factors. The first thing to blame was the minority applicant - not her own son’s limitations.</p>

<p>I think a lot of the problem people have with Affirmative Action are misconceptions. I don’t like race-based Affirmative Action. However, I will not stand for some of the reasons people have against Affirmative Action. One of the common outlashes is that AA sets the bar higher for Asians and lower for African Americans and Hispanics. There’s one huge misconception there: there is no bar. Entry to top colleges surely has some basic rules, but the fact of the matter is that there is no “bar” for entry. So why do Asian students, on average, seem to have higher SAT scores than white students (to a small extent) and other minority students at the same school? The first answer is obvious: there are more high scoring Asians out there and fewer high scoring minorities (a culture problem, but not a race issue). Because of that, the Asians who apply to top schools also have higher SAT scores on average - so of course that accepted portion of the class would have higher SAT scores. It’s not that the bar is “higher,” it’s that statistically, it’s logical given the applicant pool. The same can be said of African American students. Sure, they score lower on the SAT - and that’s a problem for the country as a whole. But for top college admissions, the African American admitted students still have something to offer. If it were merely a case of accepting “enough” African American students, it’s doubtful that as many would be rejected - and that higher scoring African Americans would be rejected than the ones who were rejected. If it were about sculpting a class out of high scoring students, you wouldn’t have white or Asian 4.0s and 2400s rejected. That’s not what it’s about.</p>

<p>I think the harm in Affirmative Action comes not from the program itself but the notions surrounding it. All throughout CC, and in the real world, people question the acceptance of minority students because they are minorities. This leads to racism, or the systematic belief that a certain race is inferior to another. Just like in that NYT article: that Hispanic girl COULDN’T have gotten in on her own merit, she MUST have been an Affirmative Action admit. Or that I MUST have gotten into Stanford because I’m a black applicant, I couldn’t POSSIBLY have done so on my own merit. Or that upper-income minority students MUST have been accepted because of Affirmative Action, but it’s bunk because they didn’t “overcome any obstacles” to get there. So they were ABUSING Affirmative Action. Why do we never think, oh, she earned it? Because we are always looking for a scapegoat.</p>

<p>Affirmative Action IS an issue, and it DOES play a role in college admissions - I’m not denying that. But minority students aren’t less qualified or less desirable in any way - they EARNED their spots through talent, work, and luck, just like the white and Asian students.</p>

342

<p>On post 341, made an error: meant international undergrad representation (vs. local undergrad representation). Hope that was obvious.</p>

343

<p>@tokenadult</p>

<p>I got in where I had my problem, so I guess it didn’t affect anything.</p>

344

<p>Mamooie312, I’m glad to hear you got in where you applied. Congratulations.</p>

345

<p>[The</a> Canadian Press: Census: Whites to hold US majority 8 years longer than expected; economy slowing immigration](<a href=“http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h5YlfJvA4aiwIVv4yzwh52tvmB9A]The”>http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h5YlfJvA4aiwIVv4yzwh52tvmB9A) </p>

<p>Left unsaid in this report is that the race and ethnicity categories are sufficiently recent and sufficiently arbitrary that individual residents of the United States might make new “sociopolitical constructs” and thus change the list of categories.</p>

346

<br>

<br>

<p>True, that’s why affirmative action based on income is far more desirable, and that based on race should be phased out. </p>

<p>Don’t agree at all with applicanot’s logic (#343). In our kids’ school, the minorities were in much the same socio economic status as the majority and the ORMs, but clearly had an edge in getting into Ivies and selective schools. If you attend any college presentation, there is so much emphasis on diversity based on race and precious little on family income, that it’s very likely that just race, and not unique life experiences, etc. factored into the decision.</p>

347

<p>It would be interesting to see more data from more colleges about how well ethnicity categories of enrolled students compare to family income categories of those same students. I don’t have many (any?) links at hand that look at a particular enrolled class from both points of view to show the interrelationships of those categories.</p>

348

<p>Dad<em>of</em>3, </p>

<p>I completely agree, that has been my point all along. An African American, or Latino applicant from the same SES stratum has that edge over an ORM in our school as well…the guidance counselors clearly accept it as fact, I myself have been told that it’s true “like it or not” …it’s an unfair advantage. I find it hard to justify entitlement programs based on race, as they generate more ill will than good. Perhaps I complain too much for some people’s tastes, but in my eyes, if it’s wrong, then there should be protest from the peoples affected.</p>

349

<p>tokenadult, I did peruse some ED boards, and there are definite instances of URMs who post their family income in the $100,000 range, and whose metrics didn’t match up with the usual admittees…this is anecdotal info of course, a truly accurate statistical analysis wouldn’t be possible because of privacy issues, but perhaps you have a way of finding out? Maybe look at the threads from last year at the ivies…of course, this is still not accurate, as the self reporting was not mandatory, ie not all students posted their families’ incomes, but perhaps if you could get >100 students, you’d see a trend.</p>

350

<p>We can’t prove that colleges do this, of course, as they do not release their statistics to the public. But assuming that a college has an average white accepted SAT score of say 2250, an average African American SAT score of 2010, and an average Hispanic SAT score of 2000, how can it bot be racist? The way I see it, if they openly admit to such a situation, they would obviously be favoring a certain race. If they say it’s harder for one race to score high on the SAT than another, they’re calling the first race less intelligent, which is racist. And if they cite economic disadvantage, they’re making a blanket statement rather than actually judging on economic status (ie, Colin Powell’s son has had as many or more opportunities than a poor white student).</p>

<p>And this really isn’t meant to offend anyone. I think that while, of course, non-minority students are hurt by affirmative action, it also devalues the achievements of minority students. If anyone has a true point to make against my argument, they won’t need to get emotional and defensive on the issue.</p>

351

<p>But I think the problem is, the confounding variable is there. Sure, there are qualified minority students, and they have it the worst, because they’re doubted at every turn.</p>

<p>Also, is it not racist to say that by nature, students of different races have different things to offer? As if one’s race is the determinant in their personality, experiences and views?</p>

352

<p>Teslacoil, they do preferentially admit students on the basis of race, and they admit it, they use a different phrase for it… “holistic admissions process”…one can glean that information by reading the stats of accepted students, and look under “hook”.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I might not use the term “racist”, especially given its inherent irony, but "extremely odious and unfair " might be an acceptable substitute term.</p>

<p>Even assuming “intangibles” such as the homeless student who wrote a book, to use applicannot’s hypothetical example, this is not fair. Why use SATs at all , then? Since applicannot states that both gpa and sats are “fudgeable”, then why not eliminate them, and use nonstandardized testing that the school chooses independently, and interviews. Oh, and the process should be race blind.</p>

353

<p>teslacoil,</p>

<p>I couldn’t agree with you more.
It is racist if racist plays a sgnificant role.
As I had stated before, we live in a politically correct but ethically incorrect country.</p>

354

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, I wouldn’t assume facts about any one college, but would want to look up the facts and see what they are in each case. If an independent researcher found a set of facts something like that, one issue to look at would be any other ways that the three groups differ that might be meaningful in the college admission context, such high school grade averages, courses taken in high school, scores on other kinds of tests, athletic ability, geographical diversity, legacy relationships, and so and so on. Patterns like that are not the end of the inquiry, but only the beginning. For most colleges, I have found it difficult to find admission data published in a format that would allow observing patterns of that kind, so I have no idea how commonplace that is or is not.</p>

355

<p>“Well, I wouldn’t assume facts about any one college, but would want to look up the facts and see what they are in each case. If an independent researcher found a set of facts something like that, one issue to look at would be any other ways that the three groups differ that might be meaningful in the college admission context, such high school grade averages, courses taken in high school, scores on other kinds of tests, athletic ability, geographical diversity, legacy relationships, and so and so on. Patterns like that are not the end of the inquiry, but only the beginning. For most colleges, I have found it difficult to find admission data published in a format that would allow observing patterns of that kind, so I have no idea how commonplace that is or is not.”</p>

<p>Of course there are other variables, but as a student of statistics, I think that if we have a sample size greater than 500 or so for each group, we can fairly hold all other things constant. And yes, the admission data isn’t published, but I’m just speaking hypothetically.</p>

<p>We can’t know for sure that this is the case, but it is widely suspected and I’m just trying to find out whether or not we would tolerate such actions were they to be proven.</p>

356

<p>This is the point in the discussion where I usually say…</p>

<p>Perhaps as an aside, for many URM students, there needs to be a certain threshold of diversity met, in order to attend, and I would think this is especially true if that upper income URM’s family is ponying up full COA. I’m not going to discuss other points here, but I DO believe if you are going to admit five or six URM’s whose scores match the average, it is more desirable to them, if you have a enough URM’s around for those to feel welcomed and comfortable. </p>

<p>Then I (hopefully) disappear for awhile…</p>

<p>But first, I’d be curious about that 500 or so sample size. Sample of what? 500 African American’s admitted to a single top ten schools freshman class in a given year? I don’t think so.</p>

357

<p>

</p>

<p>But what is this “certain threshold” and how does it differ from a quota? And is the “certain threshold” the same for all protected minorities? Or is there a specific threshold per racial classification (e.g. X% is required for blacks, but Y% is required for Hispanics, and X>Y)?</p>

358

<p>Never thought of myself as “protected” before, but whatever.</p>

<p>Not scientific or anything, but on a practical level, enough dating opportunities for a Black women, a place to get their hair done/cut, buy jeans that fit. Stuff like that. For my money, it felt like 6 percent or better, and it seems you can only find six percent or better at the “top”, or the “bottom”.</p>

<p>Yeah, i know, just a color…</p>

359

<p>sorry I made a typo, I meant to say, in post #355:</p>

<p>it is racism if race is involved ( in making the decision).</p>

<p>teslacoil, are you speaking about a power analysis?, i.e. the number of subjects needed given a known difference between the two groups studied…i.e., if the difference between the two groups ( URM and non-URMs ) is 100 points on the mean SAT, how many people will be needed in that study to prove or refute the alternate hypothesis ( ie, are urms preferentially admitted on the basis of race only , or race and socioeconomic status or SES alone…i.e., if the SAT difference is large, then the # of URMs/per SES studied doesn’t have to be large, and conversely, if the difference is small, then you’d have to have a lot of urms ( and non urms) in the study, so, e.g., if the difference in SATs is only 25, then maybe a large number, like 500 students would do the trick…that is my own non statistician explanation of power analysis.</p>

<p>The data is available, here on CC, just look at all the posted scores. However, a study of this nature would have less validity, since it didn’t take on all comers, i.e., the stats of the urms who didn’t post ( and that aren’t available to us) might skew the results, and those urms might have been selected out of your statistical sample because of , say, lack of internet. So then you could only say that the study was valid for umrs/non urms who had the willingness and ability to post stats.</p>

<p>I like my other point, which is this :</p>

<p>Looking at all urms and non urms combined, the SAT is not equally used…so why not get rid of it? If a test as a variable discriminator is not used equally across 100% of the sample population, then it’s not a valid test , is it? The individual school should come up with their own test, which would apply equally to all applicants,and which would take into account the kind of student population they are trying to “sculpt” as well ( including racial or SES factors )…as someone mentioned, the SAT was never intended for its current use, and really should be considered outmoded. Look how financially disadvantaged kids can’t do well, vs the financially lucky ones who “game” it. This kind of test, or “discriminator” would be less objectionable, since it would be equally used across the board ( assuming you could objectify factors deriving from SES or race ! )</p>

<p>We, as a society should show ( and I’m not lecturing, everyone ) kindness and understanding towards those less fortunate than we. The question is , when is the tail wagging the dog?</p>

<p>Oh, and Shrinkrap, I value your opinion, if possible , could you explain your posts a bit more, please?</p>

360

<p>

</p>

<p>As for my opinion - @applicannot - I could not have said it better myself… </p>

<p>At first the discussion started out mild and somewhat inquisitive, but as more and more people post, this ‘crowd mentality’ takes off and people post things they wouldn’t dare say in real life. Yes - you feel angry about affirmative action - so go write a letter to your local newspaper, call your district representative, email CNN - but posting in an online forum isn’t going to change anything. </p>

<p>In my honest opinion, I believe Affirmative Action does more good than HARM. Yes, it does have it’s downfalls, and can be improved. But should it be removed? ABSOLUTELY NOT.</p>

<p>In the philosophy of Booker T. Washington - “Education is the key to success.” People sometimes forget that affirmative action is meant to balance the table - by raising minorities from the ghetto and impoverishment, and educating them so they can succeed. Because lets be real with ourselves - the psychological aspect of being a “second class citizen” exists within all minorities in this country. </p>

<p>I mean - think about it. If we got rid of affirmative action, what would happen? First off - the amount of minorities in elite, and to a certain free, middle, colleges would decline - however not as sharply as you all presume (contrary to popular belief, minorities actually work hard to get into these universities). The Asian percentage would probably rise also - but this would create a huge imbalance. This isn’t good for a Universities at all - because most of them want a class more diverse than the United States actually is.</p>

<p>What can we do to improve Affirmative Action? - As of now, we should base it on a socioeconomic level. But how? Thats the main question. How in the world are admissions officers going to take all socioeconomic factors into question when considering an applicant? It’s easier and more efficient to just admit by race -as they already do. Plus it creates diversity - something every college on earth wants so they can create brochures without actually photoshopping the black people in. (Google this - its hella funny). </p>

<p>I know some of you are going to bi*** and scream and proclaim how unfair it is to admit admit a lower scoring black dude than you with your superior intellect and 2300 SAT score - but hey, life isn’t fair. What you can do, if you feel strongly enough, is to contact your representative, and raise awareness and try to get the law changed. But despite what you might think - I still believe, and will always believe that Affirmative action holds a special niche in college admissions. </p>

<p>And for those of you who don’t value diversity for the sake of diversity…I pity you.</p>