"Race" in College Admissions FAQ & Discussion 5

<p>epiphany, I want to ask where you get your info that Filipinos are advantaged in college admissions. Several high-stat Filipinos from my HS were rejected by the same schools that accepted dozens of Caucasians. Most notably, one Filipino girl who applied to and was rejected by 6 Ivies, including Columbia, Penn, and Brown. Despite living in an affluent community and attending a prestigious HS, her family was not economically stable. She was incredibly self-motivated; she attained a 4.0 GPA and excelled even in an environment of over-achievers (though there was no official class rank, she was easily amongst the top 4-5 students of the class). She was also brilliant; she scored a 2390 on her SAT and also performed spectacularly on her SAT2s. She was active in multiple organizations (and, oh so ironically, an organization that promoted diversity). I recall discussing with her brother a few years back, when she was being hit with a slew of rejections, how her family assiduously tried to find Hispanic roots in her family, but to no avail. </p>

<p>In the same year, Columbia accepted nearly a dozen unhooked Caucasian applicants from my school, as well as 7-8 unhooked from each of Brown and Penn. There were no suspensions, arrests, anything that posed a serious detriment to her application other than her race. And she was, in fact, accepted by multiple schools in the second decile of schools in the USNWR rankings. I understand that racial affirmative action is not always consistent, but how do these results coincide with your statement that Filipinos are beneficiaries of racial affirmative action?</p>

<p>

You are correct; it is not at all absurd. And there are hundreds of institutions in the US, namely state flagships, that are plentiful in their mix of ethnic groups. I would recommend that this daughter look into those if racial diversity is her interest.

And it matters how they got there and not that they ARE there because?
Mmm, feeding the political machine.</p>

<p>“And it matters how they got there and not that they ARE there because?”</p>

<p>You quoted the answer:

The full answer can’t be distilled into a few lines of a post.</p>

<p>^ Yes it can. Why are we promoting something meant to reconcile the past? I’d like to see an argument that this aspect of AA is anything other than political.</p>

<p>monstor, I’ve talked about Vietnamese & Cambodians, I think (for example). I hadn’t thought I had spent a lot of energy discussing Filipinos, but I’m open to correction on that.</p>

<p>Re Post 480: I didn’t mean that HYPSM were the only repositories of brain power in the US. Hardly. Students in the U.S. too often believe that; however, it is true that the number (& percentage) of mega-qualified students applying to the “Elites” exceeds those applying to other fine institutions that do a completely competent job of educating & producing outstanding graduates.</p>

<p>It’s nevertheless a game of institutions staying in the top perceived layer of excellence, whether that perception is accurate or way off.</p>

<p>

They are all encompassed under the larger umbrella group of SE Asians (BTW, we haven’t had Cambodian students but we’ve had a handful of Vietnamese students who can also attest that they were not beneficiaries of affirmative action) and you made the claim earlier that SE Asians benefited from racial AA. Where did you get this information because everything I’ve seen or heard regarding SE Asians suggests that they are disadvantaged by racial AA?</p>

<p>^ Admissions is always a comparative process. No one is admitted or denied (by privates) based on absolutes. You didn’t see, I didn’t see, with whom other students at your school were competing – nor how the applications looked. So whether their academic profiles were competitive for Elites is one important factor – versus other students of whatever personal background also applied in that round. A separate factor is how well that profile was expressed in the application. A third factor is what other URM’s in general – not Vietnamese in particular – applied to that college, especially from the same region – and what those applications looked like.</p>

<p>There are many hurdles to overcome when it comes to Elites. Any one factor, let alone a combination, can affect chances: academic achievement, e.c. achievement, socioeconomic status, racial/ethnic/nat’l category, U.S region, academic emphasis – to name a few.</p>

<p>I still want to know where you got the info that SE Asians were given admissions advantages because of AA. The Filipino applicant I described received guidance from her informed counselor for refining her app (as did virtually everyone else applying to Ivies from my school; that’s probably part of the reason why we get so many in each year) and I doubt her app was comparatively flawed because she still managed to get into lower-tiered top schools. But like I said, Caucasian applicants who were unhooked, weaker in GPA, test scores, and had fewer ECs, got into the same schools this particular Filipino applicant was rejected by. And do you really believe that she was rejected in favor of other high-achieving Filipinos in her area? Because that makes little sense, considering the reason why Filipinos “should” be beneficiaries of AA is because they are underrepresented.</p>

<p>Once again, this was not an isolated incident. Another trend: the few African-American applicants with qualified grades and scores from our HS seem to fare consistently well in admissions.</p>

<p>Again, the information you and I have about an applicant is only as complete and accurate as the applicant’s retelling of it to you and to me, unless we personally see the application. But more to the point, we do not see the universe of applications to a given college, which is the only way to make a comparison about whether her app was or was not “flawed,” and how her overall achievement compared to that of others. If she was a fairly impoverished Filipino with a history of educational disadvantage, relative to a superb history of achievement, then chances are she was at least looked at carefully. Beyond that, I cannot say, nor can you.</p>

<p>If there were Filipinos more economically needy and at least as qualified as her, from a region less represented than her region, perhaps they were admitted instead.</p>

<p>It’s very subjective to say that you (any student) “knows” how well qualified a particular applicant is. You know what they tell you. You know if you’ve physically seen their grades, test scores, *recommendations<a href=“doubtful”>/i</a> and awards. And even then, you still don’t know how others compared against them – from their background, from their region, with their academic interests, with their e.c.'s, etc.</p>

<p>But you did state that SE Asians get an AA boost, and I would like to know where you got your info from. You have not named a single source from where you have derived your info. At worst, I have provided accounts that suggest that SE Asians are disadvantaged in the way that the Chinese/Japanese/Indian groups are. You have offered nothing to solidify your claim.</p>

<p>

But you have supported affirmative action for African-Americans, regardless of socioeconomic stature, no? And it is common knowledge that wealthy African-Americans are indeed accepted with lower mean grades and SAT scores. Why does the standard change for Filipinos?</p>

<p>It is indeed somewhat of a leap to assume that her recommendations, essays, ECs, etc were indeed on par with the applicants that were accepted by the same schools. But if we simply fall back on that logic, we can scarcely make any argument whatsoever. Why not just speculate that African-Americans are all accepted for having subjectively stellar recommendations, ECs, essays, and leave it at that?</p>

<p>But what I am still most interested in is knowing what has led you to believe that Filipinos get an AA boost.</p>

<p>More generally, I wonder where students can find information from a college that describes the college’s consideration of student national origin in detail. Is this published somewhere where any interested person can look it up?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You are using your opponent’s argument against them. Very interesting. I wonder how many folks pick up on it.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>We are finally in agreement on something. Since we live in a plutocracy, who you know matters more than what you know. Students “believe that” because employers behave like they “believe that”, creating a vicious circle of privilege begets privilege.</p>

<p>Truth be told, if I want to know the “quality” of a student, the first question is not what school you graduated from, but what are you majoring in. This is, of course, an entirely different topic…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I didn’t pick up on it, so could you explain it to me?</p>

<p>Good luck to all of you applying this year. </p>

<p>Meanwhile, what do we know from public, Web-hosted sources about what colleges say they do as to considering what nationality group differently from another in the same “race” in the admission process?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree to an extent. I agree that “name recognition” (perception) matters, especially as entree, but academic “pedigree” has its limits as a single element. It may get you that interview during resume review, but the substance behind the pedigree must nevertheless be proven during & after the interview. Employers are not that stupid. I’ve hired (and kept) candidates with local credentials, whose work ethic & ability to learn made them sharper & more productive employees than certain others with “finer” backgrounds. And as an employee I have benefited from getting noticed with a public degree background vs. lesser producers from ‘name-brand’ (HYPSM) backgrounds.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I find that an extremely biased statement. Major can be interest, can be ability, can be both. The statement also reveals assumptions about what is involved to qualify as a scholar in any field – the level of discipline, accuracy, application of systematic reasoning, the ability to make analogies across platforms, and more. Most of the “Elites” (Brown being an exception) require significant distribution requirements, so that even (for example) a studio art major will not be admitted without proven academic ability ensuring competence to master college-level math, science, philosophy, advanced composition of content material, etc. </p>

<p>Colleges do not share your definition of “quality of student.” Their definition is rather fluidity and fluency in several areas. There are some exceptions of students who have been admitted with very angular academics, but in general that is not how it works, for the “elites.” They want accomplished science students who can write beautifully (with style as well as accuracy), and talented artists who can express themselves analytically & with precision. The true “quality student” is one who can manage most any field.</p>

<p>“Truth be told, if I want to know the “quality” of a student, the first question is not what school you graduated from, but what are you majoring in.”</p>

<p>To put your posts in their proper perspective, what is your quality ranking of (a few?) majors? It might even be entertaining! :)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>One of the arguments used by the supporters of AA has been that if students do not like the system used by the elite privates, they can always apply to the numerous fine schools that only look at academic factors. It is certainly nice to see it used by the critics as well.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It is precisely those small advantages compounded over a lifetime that gives the grads of elites that overwhelming advantage. You don’t really believe the students want to go there for the education, do you?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Why don’t you look it up? (This too is an old tactic used by the supporters, btw). At various times, I have talked about and posted data concerning the GRE scores based on disciplines, how this is an accepted fact in the rest of the world (Senior Wrangler in Cambridge, e.g.) , the work of Anne Roe (The making of a scientist) etc. Just do a search.</p>

<p>If you have data to counter the above, I love to see it. As I said before, I am no dogmatist and my hypothesis is just that, a hypothesis. No religious fanatic here.</p>

<p>I’m still wondering if any college is on record saying what it does to consider distinctions among nationalities in the same federal “race” category in the admission process. More generally, what do colleges say about consideration of student race or ethnicity in their admission process other than a desultory marking of a checkbox on the Common Data Set questionnaires?</p>

<p>“Why don’t you look it up?”</p>

<p>Because you have 152 posts to wade through.</p>

<p>“<a href=“This%20too%20is%20an%20old%20tactic%20used%20by%20the%20supporters,%20btw”>i</a>.*”</p>

<p>Hey, I asked a simple question, answerable in a few words. Your tactic is to blame me for not doing the research on your claim.</p>