I think Clarence Thomas already went down that particular road, @collegemomjam, with regard to his admission to Yale Law.
Well, we do have the Justice Thomas precedent. He was the one who preemptively brought up affirmative action, arguing that the existence of the program at Yale Law School tarnished his accomplishments. (Which really are impressive. For people who haven’t read it, I urge you to read his memoir, * My Grandfather’s Son*. Very moving.) They decided to attack him with the Anita Hill stuff instead.
I would think any future conservative POC nominee would take a similar tack of preemption. The great irony of course is that someone smart enough to be a conservative (a classical “liberal” in the tradition of Say, Locke, Mill, etc.) wouldn’t have needed affirmative action. 
Right. That “stuff”. :((
Anyway as for AA and Yale Law, Thomas’ first job was from a Yale alum (not to mention the next job from you know who) so I suppose it served him fine.
I think Justice Thomas famously said that his Yale Law School degree was worth about “15 cents” if I recall correctly. Gotta go back and check that.
I looked up the Common Data Set, for the Ivy League, class of 2021.
- Cornell- 3,349 Freshman with 268 Blacks
- University of Pennsylvania- 2,445 Freshman with 165 Blacks
- Harvard- 1,685 Freshman with 160 Blacks
- Brown-1,637 Freshman with 117 Blacks
- Columbia- 1,405 Freshman with 186 Blacks
- Yale- 1,579 Freshman with 122 Blacks
- Princeton-1,305 Freshman with 106 Blacks
- Dartmouth-1,215 Freshman with 67 Blacks
What am I missing in this thread? Are there too many Blacks on elite college campuses? Is there a belief, that the few on these campuses, are only there because of Affirmative Action? I have a senior at Cornell, a Junior at Yale, and a Freshman at the University of Pennsylvania. They all had your standard 1500+ SAT’s, 4.0+, UC’s at a very competitive Magnet Public school, that sends 20 or so kids to the Ivies, out of a class of 300+ each year. I will never buy, that my Black kids are less deserving, but I will concede the argument, that high achieving Blacks, have a higher acceptance rate.
The short version is the Supreme Court has ruled quotas are illegal. The argument from some is Harvard’s admissions has for all intents and purposes racial quotas, which would be illegal.
This is the real heart of the matter. I think the facts coming out make it very hard to argue that black students are not accomplished or qualified enought to be admitted. People are now reduced to complaining that high acheiving black students are not competing in the regular pool. I think this argument is ultimately going to fail. I believe the courts will accept as permissible, Harvard’s desire to have a diverse campus. Just as the high achieving kid from rural Kentucky will have a far easier time then the high achieving kid from suburban NY. Whether that preferance for diveristy is in fact good for the school or for society in general is another question entirely. I believe the courts are going to concede that Harvard has the right to choose to have it.
No doubt it’s been a huge positive for my kid who has benefited (as a white rural/suburban kid) from her time with peers with vastly different beliefs and perspectives that come from their race, ethnicity, religion, state/country etc. She is not the same kid I sent off 3 years ago. Her perspective and views have expanded in ways I never imagined they would.
Even if Harvard’s diversity attempts are not really for those who benefit directly by a particular admissions preference, and really are there to benefit the “main customer” of wealthy whites and their mind-broadening, I suspect it accomplishes both, with the same tool.
Of course you have to be one of the ~5% of applicants who get in to benefit from all that.
I think some of the bitterness is not directed at the URM’s with your kids qualifications (not counting if they were a recruited athlete). An unhooked white boy with your kid’s qualifications (again without sports), has a miniscule chance of admission to an ivy+. At our high school, its been at least 6 years since an unhooked white boy got in. Girls and URMs get a few slots each year, but nothing like your school.
If your public magnet is in the Bronx or Manhattan I’d love to hear your thoughts about the push to get rid of the SHSAT exam.
Just for the record, everyone (well, perhaps besides recruited athletes) has a miniscule chance at admission to an Ivy+.
Do any turn away fewer than 9 out of 10 applicants? Harvard turns away 19 out of 20.
I’ll repeat this post from another poster.
[QUOTE=""]
Just for the record, everyone (well, perhaps besides recruited athletes) has a miniscule chance at admission to an >>Ivy+.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe the girls and URMs get in at a 5-10% rate. The unhooked white/asian boys are completely shut out over the past 6 years at out HS. The white boy slots go to the legacies, elite feeder high schools, and development cases. Ya see, I’m annoyed at the entire system, not just AA. If you want to really see how these high performing kids feel, head over to reddit. There is an “applyingtocollege” subreddit that is quite salty.
I throw out a n=1 case from 2 years ago. Asian Male, 1600 SAT 4.0GPA, Val or Sal, US National Champion in a well known STEM EC you all know. Got completely shut out of any T20 he applied. There is absolutely no way if he was female or a URM he doesnt get in somewhere T20.
Note that females generally have a harder time getting into top 20 schools than males. But if they are female with proficiency in a field normally dominated by males, then it can be a boost.
This is the sort of nonsense that gets repeated ad infinitum.
We’ve only got the detailed information from Harvard. But already we can see some very interesting things with regard to legacies and URM (other groups too, but let’s just concentrate on these).
If you are a legacy and you are merely in the top half of the applicant pool on academic measures only (without even considering any other aspect of the application) then you were admitted at a 55% rate, ok? Now, I might not be the math competitor that my kid is, but last I calculated 55% is not miniscule. Unfortunately, I cannot provide the exact SAT/GPA needed to land in this top half, but nearest I can figure we are talking about roughly a 1400-1420 SAT equivalent and greater than an A- GPA. Those are not stellar stats for the tippiest of tippy top schools in my opinion, especially in light of the level of privilege that Harvard legacies as a group must have enjoyed. And a 55% admit rate is extremely high. And this is Harvard, almost certainly the most selective of the Ivies.
Now, if you are an African American student, and your stats place you in the truly excellent range, meaning SAT of approximately 1570+ combined with a near perfect 4.0 UW GPA, then your admission rate was approximately 57%. There are only approximately 20 black applicants to Harvard a year with these sorts of stats. However, you don’t need quite those sorts of stats to enjoy that sort of admissions rate. African Americans anywhere within the top 40% of the applicant pool - again solely on academic measures - enjoyed greater than 45% blended admit rates.
For Hispanics, the numbers are a bit lower, but still extraordinarily high relative to other racial and ethnic groups. Hispanics in the top 10% saw admit rates of greater than 35%; top 40% greater than 24% blended.
Hopefully, with that information now provided for the millionth time on this thread, we can have a serious discussion of preference. Keep in mind that with legacies especially and even with URM, we are often talking about very privileged kids. All those legacies and URM at the finest boarding and private schools across the United States find their way disproportionately into the Ivy applicant pools, especially as the legacy and URM preferences are understood to be so powerful, even though until now they were hard to quantify. I am not taking anything away from their accomplishments, but to use the moral term “deserve” admission is offensive to many people who do not enjoy these sorts of preferences.
Here is the single table to look at to see thee numbers, Table B.5.2 on p.115 here: http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf
Legacy data on p.10 here (Academic 1 and 2 rating corresponds with top 50% of the overall applicant pool): http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-421-112-May-1-2013-Memorandum.pdf
What Satchel is pointing out is illegal for schools getting public money.
@NoKillli do you have any stats to back up your claim that females have an easier time getting into a top school than males??? It’s my understanding that it’s actually the opposite, all things being equal. I don’t study the stats like some of the incredible researchers on this thread, but I remember seeing a few years back that at Brown a female had a 4% chance of admission and a boy had a 7% chance, or something like that.
And just for the record, my suburban white daughter from NJ who was Valedictorian, Youth Volunteer of the Year, 4 year varsity swim/captain, Model UN leader, you name it got outright rejected from Harvard and U Penn (and the salutatorian with lower stats got a waitlist at Penn…a male). She did get into a different Ivy and decided not to attend and is killing it a a different top 20 school…no hard feelings. She knew her chances were slim at the other two schools and never for a minute felt that it wasn’t “fair”. As her mother, I wanted her to get some rejections so that she had no “what ifs” later in life, and it’s also good for them to experience rejection. It’s part of life.
I like the what you say @gallentjill in your post #2428 and while I truly don’t think this is a black and white issue (no pun intended…meaning there is a big gray area here) I am at least hoping that your prediction is right…we shall see.
Oh, and my daughter had a 1540 OLD SAT. So there was nothing missing from her application.
Female preference at the elites is probably limited to talented STEM applicants, especially in the hard sciences and math (not sure about biology - probably no preference). A female who qualifies AIME for instance, will enjoy tremendous advantages in admissions to MIT and other top schools, compared with males with similar qualifications. (This is based largely on anecdote, but having been close to the math competition world for a while, I can say that there are a lot of anecdotes.)
I don’t think females enjoy any systematic preference in other areas of expressed interest; in fact, I suspect that the competition is a bit tougher because as everyone knows females have higher conscientiousness on average than males (and with lesser variability), which inter alia means that females tend to be better students and get better grades.
So, I always say to girls, get involved in math competitions; it might just help with college admissions down the line. Speaking for all the boys I know who are involved, they would be happy to see you there.
@collegemomjam I think the gender acceptances rates just depend on the goals of the school and trying to reach a balance. Being a female applicant is an advantage at MIT, Cal Tech, and Carnegie Mellon for sure, and maybe being a female in a STEM discipline (especially engineering and Computer Science) may give an advantage at some schools. But there are schools like Brown and Vanderbilt that definitely favor guys. I think it is hard to put a blanket statement on the acceptance rates by gender.
@NoKilli
My Yalie, was a recruited athlete. Our public magnet, is in the suburbs of Atlanta. In our program, you have to test in the 95th percentile, to be placed into a lottery.