As an Asian applicant who is lower income than most of the URMs in my school, in the college admissions process, I believe that affirmative action is unjust.
The most privileged white guy at my school gamed Affirmative Action by checking the Hispanic Box because his great-grandparents were from Spain. He was admitted to Harvard this year with a 3.8/2130 according to Naviance. Even though what he did was unjust, the entire system is unjust, so its hard not to admire him.
HOWEVER, I also know that many URMs will over-estimate the impact of Affirmative Action. My latino classmate who applied to Stanford early (and who was rejected), believed that he was a shoo-in for Stanford even though he had a 26 ACT/3.6GPA. Race, while never “the factor,” is “a factor” in the college applicant process. Just because one is a URM, does not mean that they will get to pick and choose their colleges.
Such, to applicants who are ORMs, race plays a more important role than they initially assume in the college admissions process. Usually, to URMs, they play less of a role since most URMs aware of AA believe that they can get into any college because they are URM, which is far from the truth.
Denying that AA is simply ignorance. Check out UCHICAGO’s survey from the class of 2020.
https://www.chicagomaroon.com/article/2016/9/14/class-2020-survey/
According to the survey, the average SAT of an Asian admit was a 2280; for a Hispanic admit, it was a 2090. This is not coincidence.
@hebegebe There is an underlying reason for every category of admissions. I am able to find value in all of them and not have a high level of heat about any of them. I simply find it strange that I am often alone in that.
@bubblepop12444 I do not believe it any more or less unjust than any other category a school determines is of import to them. As you note race is “a factor”, not “the factor”. Therefore, it is no more or less a factor than anything else (I am happy to be wrong but I believe affirmative action has helped women well more than it has helped URMs even when you account for African American women). So again, my question is simply why aren’t Asian applicants suing about legacy admissions or athletic admissions or development admissions. And if the answer is because there is more value in those categories than seen in affirmative action, my follow up question is why?
Oh you saw his application so you know this? You know he brought zero skills, talents or attributes to H other than his Hispanic great-grandfather and his gpa and scores?
Yeah right.
I will counter your anecdote with one of mine. My Latino kid with near perfect ACT scores from a rural part of flyover land was rejected at Harvard. According to bubblepop12444, the kid should have been in.
FYI Latinos can be of ANY race.
I’m not saying that race was the sole reason he got in. It’s undeniable that race allowed colleges to compromise his below average scores and GPA. Instead of being so quick to say that AA doesn’t exist, why don’t you read and try to understand my perspective?
Isn’t this a thread to debate AA, not to shut down oppositional ideas so quickly…
It is undeniable that AA exists. It is undeniable it can create outlying cases where it is grossly unfair. I still fail to understand why we choose to highlight it singularly to legally dismantle and call out so publicly over equally unfair categories that create the same grossly unfair outlying cases. Are those who so vocally call out AA, also calling out those other categories?
In the end, I believe we will always have something to point to as unjust because the reality is colleges can not (and do not want to) take everyone with perfect test scores and grades. It is not possible. IMO, we would simply find something else to point to as a sign of inequity.
In a different thread, a poster pointed out that at University of Minnesota there are just under 9,000 students who scored a 1500+ on the SAT (M & CR). Nationwide there are sooooo many high achieving students and highly interesting students (who perhaps don’t appear to you to be worthy.) It is impossible to generalize at the local level what is “fair” or not.
I happen to think that in poli sci classes it is useful have students who can represent farming and manufacturing backgrounds. I think that it is useful to have students who can speak to civil rights issues and migrant workers issues in an American History class. I think it is useful to have minority women in premed classes because their medical needs are underrepresented in medical research. etc, etc. Not all things should be decided strictly by test scores.
Our country has an abundance of great colleges. Everyone who was competitive for the ivies will find a place that will educate them and stretch their abilities. It is not a zero sum game. I am not going to pity a student who goes to Carnegie Mellon because of not getting a place at Princeton.
@“Snowball City” ^^^^ All. Of. This. slow clapping loudly
@“Snowball City” You can’t just make the assumption that all Asians who have high test scores lack good personal qualities to them or don’t have interesting backgrounds. Or, that they all want to go to Princeton^^^^… I am Asian, but I didn’t even apply to any Ivy League college or Carnegie Mellon. Even if I do get into college, I’d probably have to go to the one that gives me the most FA since my situation doesn’t provide me the privilege to just pick and choose. I’m just pointing out that the college application process is incredibly flawed, and AA is flawed as well.
I did not know if you were Asian or not. I said nothing about Asians with high test scores. In my part of the county most Asians are lower income and recruited by the local colleges.
If you want to be upset about the process that is fine but focus instead on how it is that at most top colleges half of the students are full pay despite billion dollar endowments. Inquire why it is the at colleges like Amherst varsity athletes make up about half the class. Ask why it is that legacies have far higher admit rates.
Lots of people have to follow the financial aid money. Their is no shame in that. I am married to one.
@“Snowball City”
I think your Minnesota numbers are wrong. A 1500 composite on the new SAT is the top 2%. With 1.7million taking the test, you’re looking at 17-34k nationwide scoring that high each year.
I think she meant in all four years of the undergraduate population. Undergrad population is just under 35,000 IIRC
Here is the data on UMN Twin Cities section C9 has the scores for the middle 25-75% of the incoming class that entered in fall of 2014. It is late and I have not searched for more recent numbers.
http://www.oir.umn.edu/static/stsur/cds_2014_2015_TC.pdf
75% starts at SAT CR 690 Math 750 ACT Composite 30 Math 30 English 31
Further breakdown follows on the pdf. Far more students applied with ACT scores than SAT. ACT scores are just reported as 30 and above.
The numbers may not meet exactly what she had said but I think we can agree that there are way more smart students in the country than can fit into the tippy top universities and colleges, all of whom could do the work at those colleges if they wanted to go there.
Here are the score ranges for admitted students - not necessarily enrolled. There probably were a lot of cross admits with U Of Wisconsin at Madison since the two states have agreements. However UMN is much more generous with the merit money than Madison
https://admissions.tc.umn.edu/academics/profile.html
@crimsonmom2019
You must not have been here very long if you think getting rid of legacy and development admits isn’t a regular CC topic.
@roethlisburger I’m sorry if my point wasn’t as clear as I wanted as I agree they are regular topics here on CC. I have seen many about athletes as well. It is why I kept stating “call out publicly” and “legal dismantling” which again I also meant from a public perspective. I do not believe those categories receive the same deep dialogue and discussion in the public arena and I would hope that those who are so vocal here about AA would do so about all the other categories as well is all.
They aren’t being challenged in courts. CC is a whole different thing 
There is a level of hostility around AA that we don’t see as much with sports and legacies. This thread has been going on for years. To my knowledge there is not a thread that rehashes - “A squash player at my school got into Amherst and he had a lower GPA than I did. I am a really good bassoon player and I didn’t get in. It is not fair!”
If there is such a thread, I would like to read it.
1 Like
@crimsonmom2019
My take is athletes get way too much of an advantage in college admissions. At the least, I would treat athletics as no more valuable than any number of other ECs. On development admits and legacies with a history of donations, the university needs money to run, for among other reasons keeping tuition affordable for everyone else. Some might even argue, part of the benefit of HYP, is the chance to rub shoulders with the children of the rich and powerful, and use those connections to launch a career.
Agreed.
This is the reason why-- according to my kids who attended Berkeley, WUSTL Stanford and Vanderbilt–“fun” people don’t want to even apply to Caltech, a purely merit based school.
They have all made friends and connections at their respective schools who are smart, ambitious, and to be honest, more privileged than they are.
They find it stimulating.
@roethlisburger
I would argue having athletics is a reason some development parents contribute. Lots of donations to the school when athletic programs are doing well. LOL To bring it back around, though, I’m all for race being a hook as all the other hooks. Hope we get to a point where publicly, like here on CC, they are viewed more or less equal.
Question: has anyone been able to accurately determine when the AA hook is used vs the other hooks when a student falls in multiple categories? Is there even a way to do this?